Any objections?

>>49244212

Yeah: alignment systems are dumb as fuck.

Looks pretty gr8

>>49244226
That which can be asserted without evidence can be dismissed without evidence.

>>49244262
>opinions
>needing evidence

>>49244212
>Impact font
>Black lettering on cool colored backgrounds
>Not even using contrasting outlines for your letters
I object. I object to this travesty of graphic design in the strongest ways.

>>49244262
Your gay ass chart is solid evidence that alignments are shit

File: 1471875538969.jpg (68KB, 451x489px) Image search: [Google]

68KB, 451x489px

The fuck is your point, faggot?

File: le new alignment face.png (36KB, 997x997px) Image search: [Google]

36KB, 997x997px

>>49244317
You're right. Here's an improved version.

>>49244262
Which applies to most characters using the alignment system, funnily

>>49244262

Want evidence? Okay.

How many people do you know in real life that conveniently fall into one of these alignments in everything they do all of the time?

>>49244549
All of them. They're all unaligned.

File: images.jpg (7KB, 225x225px) Image search: [Google]

7KB, 225x225px

>>49244452

>>49244584
>Real world people are unaligned meme

>>49244584

Except there are a vast variety of loyalties in this world to things and concepts waaaay more complicated and numerous than 'good' and 'bad'.

Alignment systems are archaic, un-immersive and limiting. Alignment systems need to fucking die.

>>49244679
Why would that matter anyway? Alignment's not intended to be applied to the real world.

>>49244679
Get over yourself, turbo-autist.

File: alignments.png (5KB, 360x600px) Image search: [Google]

5KB, 360x600px

I fixed up the chart for you.

>>49244584
Then so too should all characters be.

>>49244972
No, but creating realistic characters requires them to have realistic properties. And a lot of people prefer semi-realistic characters to the most basic archetypal ones
Well, realistic after you take away the magic and shit

>>49246353
>True Neutral
>hits too close to home

It really is. It's hard to accept that kind of bland everyday ambivalence as the norm.

File: Alignment Reinterpreted.jpg (95KB, 890x756px) Image search: [Google]

95KB, 890x756px

>>49250545
Forgot my pic

>>49244262
this ain't debate class you fucking dweeb

>>49244549
>How many people do you know in real life that conveniently fall into one of these alignments in everything they do all of the time?

None, but they're not supposed to. Alignment is the sum of your actions, not the source.

File: 1461860166263.png (416KB, 950x760px) Image search: [Google]

416KB, 950x760px

>>49244212
*sigh*
I should just combine what I'm about to post into a single image.

1/3

File: 1458861969324.png (94KB, 891x951px) Image search: [Google]

94KB, 891x951px

>>49251229
2/3

File: 1457079217034.png (149KB, 1322x1165px) Image search: [Google]

149KB, 1322x1165px

>>49251251
3/3

I like drives and motivations that they use in other better games. Alignment sure is fun except when the DM uses it to fuck you over big time because he expected me to banish the succubi and not marry her

File: American Media Alignment Chart.png (99KB, 864x864px) Image search: [Google]

99KB, 864x864px

Take this OC with a grain of salt.

I haven't played dnd in 5 years but this kind of shit still make me mad as hell.

>>49251413
And of course I misspell something out of apathy. That'll trigger my autism forever.

yeah why is it even in the game, except as an excuse for some players to dick over the rest

>>49244262
No-one quite falls into one, it's very easy to rationalise why people may fall into multiple categories, even opposing ones, especially at different times in their life.
If everyone is unaligned, there's no need for any other alignment.
It creates dumb arguments over what alignment people should be, and causes some players to play to their alignment rather than any real thing people would, like a goal or central philosophy.
It creates an excuse for people who like to say 'it's what I'd do, I'm X alignment'.
What counts as 'good' or 'evil' is subjective, therefore up to the whim of the DM who decides the morals of the setting.
It doesn't make sense that certain spells would be able to make these complicated judgements and have effects based on them, only celestial alignment makes sense (i.e., what plane you're from)
Alignment stereotypes like >>49246353
People claiming that 'certain alignments just wouldn't be adventurers', without regard for character traits outside of alignment, e.g., spoony on chaotic neutral, literally my dad on true neutral.
There are a lot of reasons alignments are stupid, stupid.

>>49251229
>methods
Don't even bother with two more.

File: 1473365860167.png (28KB, 997x997px) Image search: [Google]

28KB, 997x997px

>>49244212
>>49244452
I think this color scheme works best.

File: Alignments.png (43KB, 480x460px) Image search: [Google]

43KB, 480x460px

Just gonna throw this in here since it seems relevant.

Daily reminder that any character that isn't unintelligent should have some kind of Evil alignment, stop deluding yourselves, moralcucks

>>49253788
This, I mandate in my games that anyone with 12 or more intelligence needs to be some kind of Evil, and Paladins specifically need to have 8 or less intelligence.

File: Color_Wheel.jpg (86KB, 498x500px) Image search: [Google]

86KB, 498x500px

>>49244212
I use the MTG Color Alignment Pie in 5e. It's a lot more flexible in that regard, and because 5e knew alignment is flawed, there is absolutely nothing that is mechanically tied to 9-point alignment.

>>49253788
I actually ban my players from doing anything that benefits any character but their own. Once a player passed a pencil to another and i had to pin his hand to the table with my kukuri. I don't think you guys would know about those, they're these really cool indonesian flick knives with a serrated blade.

>>49251267
This is the closest to a sensible system I've seen.

I'm reminded of a bit in the Night Angel trilogy. One character is talking about how he can see 'the wicked' to inflict violent justice upon them. The guy he's speaking to nitpicks it to shit. If it's crime, what happens if you pursue one of the 'unclean' across a naional border? If it's guilt, what happens when you encounter someone unrepentant? If someone attemped something evil but failed (and would do it again if the opportunity arose), is it no-harm-no-foul because hey, nobody was hurt.

Lawful/Chaotic works best if there's a consistent scale. Same with good/evil as well, really.

King of Dragon Pass doesn't do alignment, but it has something close- divine and ancestral approval. You're "good" if you venerate the divine. You're "evil" if you don't. Shit like stealing from your allies, animal sacrifice, sending curses to your foes and taking people as slaves are all considered "good" most of the time, because morality in the setting is expressly dictated by the gods.

When you have a real-life situation with differing viewpoints, alignment breaks down. Is The Punisher Lawful, or Chaotic?

Of course he's lawful. He's got a strict "criminals must die" code he always follows. A list of acceptable targets. He's never broken that code.

Of course he's Chaotic. He's a vigilante who gleefully ignores due process and the central elements that define the US legal system, instead just gunning people down on a whim.

I guess he's neutral then? Which means The Punisher, a character who's willing to kill and die for his hideously passionate convictions and beliefs is... neutral.

>>49254017
>kukuri
>indonesian flick knives with a serrated blade

I can't tell what precise levels and methods of irony are at play here, if any

>>49253486
>Chaotic Good
>Not in the Edgy Zone
It seems you and some of the people I've played with have differing perspectives on what Chaotic Good is.

>>49253943
I do the same. By mixing colors together it helps.make characters coherent.

File: The Kingdom of War - Lord Death On A Horse stands Victorious.jpg (181KB, 900x579px) Image search: [Google]

181KB, 900x579px

>>49254017
KODP explicitly only allows you to play from an Orlanthi viewpoint; Pelorians, Praxians, Dragonewts and Trolls all have pretty divergent ideas of right and wrong and good and evil to the Orlanthi.

>>49254259
Fair enough.

But if you do something the trolls don't like they just raid you. Which they do anyway. Whereas your gods actually pass relevant judgement.

Good point though.

>>49244212
Yeah, it's shit. I bet you even allow paladins in your games.

>>49254993
Paladins are awesome
especially in 5th edition where they got rid of the alignment restrictions

>>49254150
those are just randumb goody two-shoes

>>49253788
Daily reminder that true intelligence begets compassion and altruism. Therefore, no Evil character could have Intelligence score above 8

>>49244212
Yes. Blue is clearly lawful good.

>>49244212
Yes.
Personally, I prefer having one axis for selflessness to selfishness, and one axis for individuality to conformity. And while those two are similar, they aren't the same.

File: 1531912_566115803480654_1855722263_n.jpg (10KB, 261x173px) Image search: [Google]

10KB, 261x173px

>>49244212
For god's sake not this again.
There are two alignment charts that make sense.
The first one is Law vs Chaos. If you're Law, you're on the side of civilization and the forces of good in the bigger picture. If you're Chaos, you're on the side of the wilderness and the forces of evil in the bigger picture. If you're Neutral you're anyone else.

The 9 alignments from AD&D have very clear and explicit definitions due to people bothering Gary Gygax for years about this shit, while constantly ignoring the fact that he did adress how and why those worked in Dragon magazine, online and in the fucking DMG.

The essential reason people get alignments wrong or find them too complex is either because they're dumb fucks or underestimate the intelligence of Gygax's work, just like any stupid fuck will underestimate any rule or concept they don't understand from D&D like alignment languages, gold for xp or, really anything they feel like arguing about.

Talon's Law applies in D&D universe. Unambiguous Good & Evil exist in D&D. And it does NOT follow neither real life nor hollywood morality. It's its own thing.

WHEN you actually know and understand how the alignments work, like, how they really were supposed to work, not anybody's interpretation thereof, you can decide whether you want no alignment, one of the official alignments or your own alignment charts, like the socio-political alignments of England Up'Turnd or the cosmic alignments of Carcosa. Plus your chart is how people used to do the basic alignment chart, proving you have no idea what you're doing. If anyone looks a bit close, they'll notice lots of old D&D product mentioned alignment this way :

Asshole McDwarf AL Chaos (Good)
Elfy The Elf AL Neutral (Evil)
et cetera.

>>49256142
This guy gets it.
You can just do whatever the fuck you want.
What pisses me off is people going "it's open to interpretation :)"

Look at comic book heroes. Red and Blue are good, purple and green are evil. Work out the rest in between from there.

>>49255302

Indeed. Smart creatures work in teams, which requires at the very least cooperation and compassion.

Or course, this highlights another huge failing of the alignment system: namely that it doesn't do so well modeling "us vs them" scenarios.

>>49256871
Humans are smart, but not that smart
Humans are good, but not that good
I've solved your riddle, post doer

>>49254091

I believe that's it's exaggeration modified by projective derision.

>>49256927
I think he's just making a joke, but sure we can call it your thing too I guess

>>49256681

Green Lantern and Red Skull would like a word with you.

>>49256940

Yes, but the question is to how the joke is constructed. We dissect in order to learn.

>>49244212
You can use it as a guideline to get an idea of what kind of character you want to play.
Beginners can use it to make sure they don't create lolrandumb characters who are living saints one second and twisted fucking psychopaths the next.
but in reality you can't force a single person in one of those squares, the real world is many shades of gray and the allignment system can be a burden to experienced roleplayers who want to create a more complicated character.
It has it's place, but should be used as a guideline, not as rules set in stone.
Also because everyone has their own idea of what lawfull good or chaotic evil entails, resulting in hour long arguments that suck the fun out of a session.
Example; a friend of mine is an avid believer in "lawful good doesn't mean lawful nice", our DM on the other hand, thinks that good characters should inherently be nice, and that if he continues to act like a dick he'll shift him down to lawful neutral. Player doesn't agree with this, objects, DM remains stubborn, argument ensues, game grinded to a halt. I try to intervene and tell them to just leave it for now, we can settle this later, it doesn't work, game ruined.

>>49244212
MY OBJECTION IS AS FOLLOWS:

Alignment was better when it had one axis (lawful, neutral, or chaotic) and referred to with which celestial forces, if any, you were aligned rather than a weird mish-mash of your personality, your ethics, and whether or not you trust the cops.

>>49256995
but you also kill it in the process

File: 1458791562021.png (23KB, 599x518px) Image search: [Google]

23KB, 599x518px

This is objectively the best chart.