Has D&D alignment system changed?

[Astromancer]

When I played D&D there were nine alignments, but I saw a chart with twenty-five alignments. Is that official? When was the change made? Where can I get a good explanation of the new Alignments if any?

Thank you.

[Anthony]

Alignment in 1st edition: 'we have alignments. Don't look too closely at what they mean'.
Alignment in 5th edition: 'we have alignments. Don't look too closely at what they mean'.

[Andrew Hackard]

Pretty sure you saw a parody. The only real changes in D&D alignment were from LNC (one axis) in Basic to LNC/GNE (two axes) in Advanced, and that system has been used in every edition since except 4E*, which had a linear LG-G-N-E-CE where LG was really, really good and CE was really, really better. I mean evil.

* No "edition warring" here, please. Lots of people, including me, played 4E and enjoyed it.

I think the only substantive change in the two-axis system recently has been to allow for completely unaligned creatures, which are mostly unintelligent or constructs and cannot be said to have any moral sense whatsoever.

[Bruno]

I'm kind of curious how they got 25.

Various different versions of the Outer Planes sometimes had intermediate planes between the outer 8 to the 8 alignments that weren't True Neutral, much like how they toyed with "Para-Elemental planes". You can interpret those as defining more alignments (Neutral Good By Chaotic Good vs Chaotic Good by Chaotic Neutral etc etc.)

But that only gives you a system with the 8 original outer alignments, 8 intermediate alignments, and neutral = 17 "Alignments". If you crossed the entire enhanced outer-ring of 16 with neutral to make an inner ring around neutral (Neutral by Neutral Evil, Neutral by The One Between Neutral Good And Chaotic Good), you'd have 33 alignments, not 25.

[tanksoldier]

Originally Posted by Astromancer

When I played D&D there were nine alignments, but I saw a chart with twenty-five alignments. Is that official? When was the change made? Where can I get a good explanation of the new Alignments if any?

Unless you post a link it's impossible to tell hat you saw.

However, 5e still has the standard 9 alignments.

[Astromancer]

Originally Posted by Bruno

I'm kind of curious how they got 25.

Various different versions of the Outer Planes sometimes had intermediate planes between the outer 8 to the 8 alignments that weren't True Neutral, much like how they toyed with "Para-Elemental planes". You can interpret those as defining more alignments (Neutral Good By Chaotic Good vs Chaotic Good by Chaotic Neutral etc etc.)

But that only gives you a system with the 8 original outer alignments, 8 intermediate alignments, and neutral = 17 "Alignments". If you crossed the entire enhanced outer-ring of 16 with neutral to make an inner ring around neutral (Neutral by Neutral Evil, Neutral by The One Between Neutral Good And Chaotic Good), you'd have 33 alignments, not 25.

The Law/Chaos axis was Lawful, Social, Neutral, Rebel, and Chaotic. The Good/Evil axis was Good, Moral, Neutral, Impure, and Evil. Five times five gives you twenty-five.

[Andrew Hackard]

Yeah, that's not core D&D.

[Stormcrow]

I did a Google search of these terms, and the first hit is about alignment charts as Internet memes. It includes this passage:

5×5 Alignment Charts were never designed by the official game. Instead, the additional categories for both axis -- social and rebel; and moral and impure respectively -- are products from the internet. The earliest known instances of a 5×5 Alignment Chart being used dates back to June 5, 2011, when the DeviantArt account DoASpotCheck uploaded their 5 by 5 Alignment Chart comprised of different characters from various subcultures that they feel epitomizes each category.

[Stormcrow]

P.S.: Wikipedia has a good history of alignment through the various editions of D&D.

[ak_aramis]

Originally Posted by Andrew Hackard

Pretty sure you saw a parody. The only real changes in D&D alignment were from LNC (one axis) in Basic to LNC/GNE (two axes) in Advanced, and that system has been used in every edition since except 4E*, which had a linear LG-G-N-E-CE where LG was really, really good and CE was really, really better. I mean evil.

* No "edition warring" here, please. Lots of people, including me, played 4E and enjoyed it.

I think the only substantive change in the two-axis system recently has been to allow for completely unaligned creatures, which are mostly unintelligent or constructs and cannot be said to have any moral sense whatsoever.

Sorry, Andrew, but wrong on several counts.

AD&D "True Neutral" wasn't just "Neutral on both axises" - but was "avoiding any kind of imbalance in both" - 3.0 and later lack the "True Neutral" sub-alignment of "Neutral", while the rules of AD&D 1E imply but do not explicitly give a simple "Neutral on both" (nor do they prevent it - sloppy writing on Gygax's part). AD&D 2E actually explicitly states that True Neutral characters are expected to side with the underdog at all times.
AD&D 2E PHB "True Neutral":

True Neutral: True neutral characters believe in the ultimate balance of forces, and they refuse to see actions as either good or evil. Since the majority of people in the world make judgments, true neutral characters are extremely rare. True neutrals do their best to avoid siding with the forces of either good or evil, law or chaos. It is their duty to see that all of these forces remain in balanced contention.
True neutral characters sometimes find themselves forced into rather peculiar alliances. To a great extent, they are compelled to side with the underdog in any given situation, sometimes even changing sides as the previous loser becomes the winner. A true neutral druid might join the local barony to put down a tribe of evil gnolls, only to drop out or switch sides when the gnolls were brought to the brink of destruction. He would seek to prevent either side from becoming too powerful. Clearly, there are very few true neutral characters in the world.

Meanwhile, 3E and later, it's undecided or don't care...
Take 3.0 for example:

Neutral, “Undecided”: A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn’t feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos. Most neutrality is a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character thinks of good as better than evil. After all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she’s not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way. Mialee, a wizard who devotes herself to her art and is bored by the semantics of moral debate, is neutral.

4E used a 5 alignment system (LG, G, E, CE, Unaligned ).
5E does use unaligned.

3.X used the 9 labels, but they mean slightly different things than in AD&D 1.

In fact, careful analysis of the Alignment rules in AD&D vs D&D 3.5 finds them quite different.

Let's compare Lawful Good in the PHB's...

AD&D 1:[indent]lawful Good: While as strict in their prosecution of law and order, characters of lawful good alignment follow these precepts to improve the common weal. Certain freedoms must, of course, be sacrificed in order to
bring order; but truth is of highest value, and life and beauty of great importance. The benefits of this society are to be brought to all.[/indent

AD&D 2:

Lawful Good: Characters of this alignment believe that an orderly, strong society with a well-organized government can work to make life better for the majority of the people. To ensure the quality of life, laws must be created and obeyed. When people respect the laws and try to help one another, society as a whole prospers. Therefore, lawful good characters strive for those things that will bring the greatest benefit to the most people and cause the least harm. An honest and hard-working serf, a kindly and wise king, or a stern but forthright minister of justice are all examples of lawful good people.

D&D 3.X

Lawful Good, “Crusader”: A lawful good character
acts as a good person is expected or required to act. She combines a commitment to oppose evil with the discipline to fight relentlessly. She tells the truth, keeps her word, helps those in need, and speaks out against injustice. A lawful good character hates to see the guilty go unpunished. Alhandra, a paladin who fights evil without mercy and who protects the innocent without hesitation, is lawful good.
Lawful good is the best alignment you can be because it combines honor and compassion.

D&D 4E:[indent]If you’re lawful good, you respect the authority of personal codes of conduct, laws, and leaders, and you believe that those codes are the best way of achieving your ideals. Just authority promotes the well-being of its subjects and prevents them from harming one another. Lawful good characters believe just as strongly as good ones do in the value of life, and they put even more emphasis on the need for the powerful to protect the weak and lift up the downtrodden. The exemplars of the lawful good alignment are shining champions of what’s right, honorable, and true, risking or even sacrificing their lives to stop the spread of evil in the world.
When leaders exploit their authority for personal gain, when laws grant privileged status to some citizens and reduce others to slavery or untouchable status, law has given in to evil and just authority becomes tyranny. You are not only capable of challenging such injustice, but morally bound to do so.
However, you would prefer to work within the system to right such problems rather than resorting to more rebellious and lawless methods.


D&D 5E:

Lawful good (LG) creatures can be counted on to do the right thing as expected by society. Gold dragons, paladins, and most dwarves are lawful good.

Basic Approach Difference
AD&D 9 alignment system's law/chaos is about social laws existing. Chaos wants no laws; law wants law above all. True neutral is a forced balance.

D&D 3's law/chaos is about honor and trustworthiness, not about social organization. Neutral is about not paying attention to the balance.

4E is a wholly different approach - LG is a crusader still, but Good is still all about the prosocial behavior... just not about going the extra mile.

5E is again law/chaos is about general honor, but is even more relativistic. in a society where Molochian baby sacrifices are the norm, the LG Character is right there doing them... whcih would be Lawful evil in AD&D.

I'd say thats a number of serious swings...