I for one would forgive the man for his past youthful mistakes.
Gygax? He went to his grave arguing that these “youthful mistakes” (made when he was a full-fledged adult with children) were not mistakes. His son Ernest (who Tenser is named for) continues to sling mud at Wizards for removing Gygax’s problematic views (and is trying to make a “biological determinist” RPG presently). Wizards released a book in this very edition that contained problematic cultural depictions in the vein of Gygax. You can view any thread on the removal of racial alignments and you will see just how many angry “biological determinists” still infect the game.
Thinking these issues are “youthful mistakes” ignores the fact they are ongoing problems in the community, even if Wizards has and is doing a good job finally addressing them
Rognir, that is no longer how D&D portrays Alignment in the current edition and Wizards of the Coast has taken pains to disavow such hurtful portrayals of the various peoples in D&D. So no, that is explicitly not RAI.
I've been gaming since the 90's, but it was with different games, mostly White Wolf Games. However D&D is a pretty large presence in the gaming landscape so I was familiar with it, and with Alignments. I will say that when I first encountered The Nine Alignments I thought it was a cool concept, organized into little boxes in a way that delighted the pattern recognizing part of my brain. Now, I played a lot of Mage, so breaking out into philosophical debates was pretty on brand for me and my friends so we hashed out the meaning and ramifications of The Nine long before I ever tried to actually play D&D. Which of course made it fall apart for me and led me to put it back together in a way that made sense. I feel like this is a process that everyone kind of goes through with it, but I suppose people starting D&D nowadays don't have literal decades of thinking about it before beginning play.
So that's my personal journey with The Nine Alignments.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Canto alla vita alla sua bellezza ad ogni sua ferita ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
I for one would forgive the man for his past youthful mistakes.
Gygax? He went to his grave arguing that these “youthful mistakes” (made when he was a full-fledged adult with children) were not mistakes. His son Ernest (who Tenser is named for) continues to sling mud at Wizards for removing Gygax’s problematic views (and is trying to make a “biological determinist” RPG presently). Wizards released a book in this very edition that contained problematic cultural depictions in the vein of Gygax. You can view any thread on the removal of racial alignments and you will see just how many angry “biological determinists” still infect the game.
Thinking these issues are “youthful mistakes” ignores the fact they are ongoing problems in the community, even if Wizards has and is doing a good job finally addressing them
What problems? What community? Me and my tiny circle of players? Just get on with it and play the game the way you want - with alignments or without.
Well, I think the first question was already answered, but, sure, I’ll bite.
Community does, in fact, matter - yes, you can ignore it at a group level, and that is great if you have an established, stable group. But reputation and community influence the ability to get new folks into the game. It influences one’s ability to find worthwhile groups at a game store or online (easier to find a diamond among diamonds than a diamond in the rough). There are lots of reasons promoting a more inclusive community matters, all of which are fairly readily apparent.
Folks can, of course, play the game they want. If they want to play a racist sexist Gygax game, they can (though I wouldn’t want to play in that group. Yuck)… but that doesn’t mean Wizards shouldn’t excise racist, sexist content from the game. And it certainly doesn’t mean we should pretend these mistakes are in the past, as the post I responded to seemed to indicate - D&D is an ongoing project of bettering itself. I, for one, am thankful for that - if it makes it easier for me to put groups together by expunging the taint of “D&D is for basement dwelling jerks” more power to Wizards.
I mean Drizzt is a good example of how alignment not always is tied to every member of that race and somehow everyone ignores his existence...
You do realize that (a) R.A.Salvatore is not E. Gary Gygax, and (b) that book was published five years after E.G.G left TSR (this is not to say that post-Gygax TSR was a model of inclusivity).
A reminder to everyone who makes the conscious choice to participate in this thread; you do so on the understanding that you follow the site rules. Please pay particular attention to the rules on appropriate conduct towards each, and on suitable (and unsuitable) topics
Rognir. None of that matters. That's Forgotten Realms specific lore nobody liked in the first place. Drizzt is one of the most hated characters in existence in the "hardcore" fandom specifically because Old Heads blame him for 'ruining' the drow and inspiring a flood of newbie imitators.
My Umbragen Watcher paladin from the depths of Khyber under Xen'drik has never heard of Lolth, Eillistrae, Drizzt, Menzoberranzen, or any of the rest, and she would be deeply confused and rather insulted if someone called her an evil spider-worshipping slaver because of nothing but her species.
If you're super into the old lore, cool. They really should make a Forgotten Realms setting book for 5e worth a damn. But that crud doesn't belong in the core books we ALL use. The PHB should be as useful for my Eberron game as it is for your Faerun game, but right now that is simply not the case, ne?
I'm aware, but it goes to show that an alignment system is not a bad tool in itself.
It doesn't show anything about alignment as a tool, since the novels don't use it as a tool (and mechanically... in a society with substantial numbers of clerics and spells such as Know Alignment (this being 2e era) why wasn't he just dealt with before the events of the story?)
I mean Drizzt is a good example of how alignment not always is tied to every member of that race and somehow everyone ignores his existence...
You do realize that (a) R.A.Salvatore is not E. Gary Gygax, and (b) that book was published five years after E.G.G left TSR (this is not to say that post-Gygax TSR was a model of inclusivity).
I'm aware, but it goes to show that an alignment system is not a bad tool in itself. Drizzt is not the only fictional character from TSR-era that was different than his folk. I mean at one point we're going to have people here insulted by the fact that monsters are called "monsters" and not adversaries or something. Although that probably was brought up already somewhere... We can continue making these mental gymnastics and re-invent the dictionary every time someone gets offended, but I would prefer WotC to focus their full intellectual capability on making the game better from a game design standpoint.
To many people, these changes ARE making the “game better from a game design standpoint” by removing elements of game design that were specifically put into the game to insult them (see any tribalistic race being written off as “evil” because Gygax explicitly saw tribal societies as primitive and inferior). Just because you do not see those elements as game design does not mean they are not part of game design.
Now, do those elements of game design directly effect me? No - I am confident in my own and my players’ ability to ignore them and am probably the most WASPy person I know, so it is not like anything discriminates against me… but I also have basic empathy and can recognise that these elements of game design DO hurt countless players and turn off countless prospective players. Removing something in the game’s design that leaves a bad taste in the mouths of players effected and those empathetic enough to recognise their fellow players’ distaste? Sounds like “making the game better from a design standpoint” to me.
Ok so it seems like the latest turn of conversation is addressing the issue that one of the cons of The Nine is that they were once used to paint entire peoples with a broad stroke and thus contributed to the stereotyping of entire groups of people in a way that was reminiscent of how actual groups of people were treated?
Because that is true and that is something that Wizard acknowledged and have taken steps to fix. Does that mean it is no longer an issue related with The Nine Alignments? I mean ... no, just because a hurt was acknowledged and steps were taken to abate the harm doesn't mean that all is forgotten, but it is promising so I can't say it's all con, either.
All I can say is that this is an issue with The Nine, but that because it has been acknowledged and steps are being taken i would consider it the least of the issues with them, just personally.
My other two issues with Alignment, namely that their vague and ill defined nature 1) pose a barrier to entry and 2) lead to arguments even for veterans loom a bit larger and outweigh their value. Especially when we have Personality, Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws that work so much better.
Ignoring Great Wheel nonsense for the moment as distracting and irrelevant... let's try this. I'm curious to see what happens.
I've left a name with Ophidimancer of a character of mine. I'm going to give you all what I would consider this character's alignment. I will give no other details. You get to know this character's alignment. You do not get to know class, species, gender, background, level, QIBF, or any other identifying information. Once I give you the alignment, I would like you to describe the character to me in your own words, as best as possible. We shall see how accurate folks are, given that many continue claiming that alignment is the only tool a proper D&D player needs to build and portray a character.
So. This character's alignment, as I would state it, is Neutral Good.
I don't think anyone's been saying alignment is the 'only' tool you need to make and portray a character, just that they find it useful among other things.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Forgiving mistakes doesn't mean they aren't mistakes. What is even your point at this point, Gnome?
Please do not contact or message me.
Oh my god I couldn't help but look it up for myself and that art. I'm in tears. This is hilariously bad.
Gygax? He went to his grave arguing that these “youthful mistakes” (made when he was a full-fledged adult with children) were not mistakes. His son Ernest (who Tenser is named for) continues to sling mud at Wizards for removing Gygax’s problematic views (and is trying to make a “biological determinist” RPG presently). Wizards released a book in this very edition that contained problematic cultural depictions in the vein of Gygax. You can view any thread on the removal of racial alignments and you will see just how many angry “biological determinists” still infect the game.
Thinking these issues are “youthful mistakes” ignores the fact they are ongoing problems in the community, even if Wizards has and is doing a good job finally addressing them
Man. And we were doing so well. For a given definition of "well", anyways.
Ah well. Seal's been broken. Time to pack this one in, too. Won't say it was nice while it lasted, but at least for a while I was less bored at work.
Please do not contact or message me.
Rognir, that is no longer how D&D portrays Alignment in the current edition and Wizards of the Coast has taken pains to disavow such hurtful portrayals of the various peoples in D&D. So no, that is explicitly not RAI.
As evidence, here is a statement they made a few years ago: https://dnd.wizards.com/news/diversity-and-dnd
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Moving on.
I've been gaming since the 90's, but it was with different games, mostly White Wolf Games. However D&D is a pretty large presence in the gaming landscape so I was familiar with it, and with Alignments. I will say that when I first encountered The Nine Alignments I thought it was a cool concept, organized into little boxes in a way that delighted the pattern recognizing part of my brain. Now, I played a lot of Mage, so breaking out into philosophical debates was pretty on brand for me and my friends so we hashed out the meaning and ramifications of The Nine long before I ever tried to actually play D&D. Which of course made it fall apart for me and led me to put it back together in a way that made sense. I feel like this is a process that everyone kind of goes through with it, but I suppose people starting D&D nowadays don't have literal decades of thinking about it before beginning play.
So that's my personal journey with The Nine Alignments.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Well, I think the first question was already answered, but, sure, I’ll bite.
Community does, in fact, matter - yes, you can ignore it at a group level, and that is great if you have an established, stable group. But reputation and community influence the ability to get new folks into the game. It influences one’s ability to find worthwhile groups at a game store or online (easier to find a diamond among diamonds than a diamond in the rough). There are lots of reasons promoting a more inclusive community matters, all of which are fairly readily apparent.
Folks can, of course, play the game they want. If they want to play a racist sexist Gygax game, they can (though I wouldn’t want to play in that group. Yuck)… but that doesn’t mean Wizards shouldn’t excise racist, sexist content from the game. And it certainly doesn’t mean we should pretend these mistakes are in the past, as the post I responded to seemed to indicate - D&D is an ongoing project of bettering itself. I, for one, am thankful for that - if it makes it easier for me to put groups together by expunging the taint of “D&D is for basement dwelling jerks” more power to Wizards.
You do realize that (a) R.A.Salvatore is not E. Gary Gygax, and (b) that book was published five years after E.G.G left TSR (this is not to say that post-Gygax TSR was a model of inclusivity).
A reminder to everyone who makes the conscious choice to participate in this thread; you do so on the understanding that you follow the site rules. Please pay particular attention to the rules on appropriate conduct towards each, and on suitable (and unsuitable) topics
Find my D&D Beyond articles here
Rognir. None of that matters. That's Forgotten Realms specific lore nobody liked in the first place. Drizzt is one of the most hated characters in existence in the "hardcore" fandom specifically because Old Heads blame him for 'ruining' the drow and inspiring a flood of newbie imitators.
My Umbragen Watcher paladin from the depths of Khyber under Xen'drik has never heard of Lolth, Eillistrae, Drizzt, Menzoberranzen, or any of the rest, and she would be deeply confused and rather insulted if someone called her an evil spider-worshipping slaver because of nothing but her species.
If you're super into the old lore, cool. They really should make a Forgotten Realms setting book for 5e worth a damn. But that crud doesn't belong in the core books we ALL use. The PHB should be as useful for my Eberron game as it is for your Faerun game, but right now that is simply not the case, ne?
Please do not contact or message me.
It doesn't show anything about alignment as a tool, since the novels don't use it as a tool (and mechanically... in a society with substantial numbers of clerics and spells such as Know Alignment (this being 2e era) why wasn't he just dealt with before the events of the story?)
To many people, these changes ARE making the “game better from a game design standpoint” by removing elements of game design that were specifically put into the game to insult them (see any tribalistic race being written off as “evil” because Gygax explicitly saw tribal societies as primitive and inferior). Just because you do not see those elements as game design does not mean they are not part of game design.
Now, do those elements of game design directly effect me? No - I am confident in my own and my players’ ability to ignore them and am probably the most WASPy person I know, so it is not like anything discriminates against me… but I also have basic empathy and can recognise that these elements of game design DO hurt countless players and turn off countless prospective players. Removing something in the game’s design that leaves a bad taste in the mouths of players effected and those empathetic enough to recognise their fellow players’ distaste? Sounds like “making the game better from a design standpoint” to me.
Ok so it seems like the latest turn of conversation is addressing the issue that one of the cons of The Nine is that they were once used to paint entire peoples with a broad stroke and thus contributed to the stereotyping of entire groups of people in a way that was reminiscent of how actual groups of people were treated?
Because that is true and that is something that Wizard acknowledged and have taken steps to fix. Does that mean it is no longer an issue related with The Nine Alignments? I mean ... no, just because a hurt was acknowledged and steps were taken to abate the harm doesn't mean that all is forgotten, but it is promising so I can't say it's all con, either.
All I can say is that this is an issue with The Nine, but that because it has been acknowledged and steps are being taken i would consider it the least of the issues with them, just personally.
My other two issues with Alignment, namely that their vague and ill defined nature 1) pose a barrier to entry and 2) lead to arguments even for veterans loom a bit larger and outweigh their value. Especially when we have Personality, Ideals, Bonds, and Flaws that work so much better.
Canto alla vita
alla sua bellezza
ad ogni sua ferita
ogni sua carezza!
I sing to life and to its tragic beauty
To pain and to strife, but all that dances through me
The rise and the fall, I've lived through it all!
Ignoring Great Wheel nonsense for the moment as distracting and irrelevant... let's try this. I'm curious to see what happens.
I've left a name with Ophidimancer of a character of mine. I'm going to give you all what I would consider this character's alignment. I will give no other details. You get to know this character's alignment. You do not get to know class, species, gender, background, level, QIBF, or any other identifying information. Once I give you the alignment, I would like you to describe the character to me in your own words, as best as possible. We shall see how accurate folks are, given that many continue claiming that alignment is the only tool a proper D&D player needs to build and portray a character.
So. This character's alignment, as I would state it, is Neutral Good.
What is your description of the character?
Please do not contact or message me.
I don't think anyone's been saying alignment is the 'only' tool you need to make and portray a character, just that they find it useful among other things.