Chaotic evil player characters....

[abrownbear9108]

is it just me or does anybody else think that they should have the chotic evil alignment available???.....or any evil alignments for that matter.

if so how would it affect gameplay?? would they have to make a different storyline for the evil players?? or would it just restrict some of the quests that you would be able to do, aka, Silver Flame quests......would they make it so that true neutral players could do a certain amount of "good aligned" quests and a certain amount of "evil aligned" quests.......would they have to make an entirely new favor Patron?? or just alter the alignment system so that by doing certain quests your alignment can shift......

just curious as to how this would affect the game......input from experienced players would be beneficial here please

[budwise09]

I'd like evil alignments and the corresponding quests/storylines, but that would be a huge change to the game, which means a lot of dev time. And since generally only a minority of players would like to play evil, they probably won't consider it.

[Kindoki]

Not to mention an 'evil alignment' would be just an excuse for ******s to grief other players. No reason to open the door imo.

[ZeroUser]

Not to mention an 'evil alignment' would be just an excuse for ******s to grief other players. No reason to open the door imo.

+1 comrade and they could use the "roleplay" excuse to justify said greifing tomfoolery

[Memnir]

anybody else think that they should have the chotic evil alignment available???.....or any evil alignments for that matter.No.


if so how would it affect gameplay?It would be more problematic then it'd be worth to go back and retool every quest in the game to suit an evil standpoint.


To quote Egon: It would be bad.

[Uska]

NO!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!


There is no point to evil in this game maybe they could have set it up to allow for evil alignments but they didnt all it would do now is give some players something they could try to claims as an legit excuse to be jerks.

[vettkinn]

+1 comrade and they could use the "roleplay" excuse to justify said greifing tomfoolery

What do you mean by "Comrade"?

[GeneralDiomedes]

No for the 38th time.

[Dr.Maul]

would create a mess, imo...
if they were to restrict quest to certain alignments... the community would be griefing- your characters would be too alignment specific- you want to get this loot- your not that alignment! especially paladins, only one alignment, ***?
but if you were not to put the quest restricting- by all means go ahead! As long as gameplay is even- and evil alignment is made for wielding unholy weaps only

[mediocresurgeon]

is it just me or does anybody else think that they should have the chotic evil alignment available???.....or any evil alignments for that matter.

Yes, absolutely. This is Eberron. In Eberron, people are held accountable for what they do, not what their alignment is. Just because you are Evil does not mean you are not a law-abiding citizen, or that you are somehow disloyal to the City of Stormreach.

As for the Silver Flame:
-Clerics may be of opposing alignment to their deities in Eberron. In-game example: Archbishop Driden. He, and many other evil clerics of the silver flame, are still granted spells.
-Players may already undertake mission for the Emerald Claw (an undead-worshiping cult) yet the Silver Flame does not prosecute them for it. In fact, these mission grant Silver Flame favor.
-Players already have a quest where they slaughter lawful good paladins, chaotic good halflings, and even innocent churchgoers simply because they are worshipers of the Sovereign Host. This grants Silver Flame favor, but is clearly not a quest any RP Paladin is going to undertake.


if so how would it affect gameplay?
Evil players would not take damage from many enemy attacks, such as the archers in the desert (who have Pure Evil weapons) as well as some attacks from the Demon Queen. Evil players would also be immune to Horoth's Blasphemy spell, and certain monster which cast Unholy Word (such as in Gianthold Tor).

Holy weapons would give such players a negative level, and they would have to UMD Pure Good weapons. For high level gameplay, however, neither of these things would matter--Greensteel weapons have never had UMD requirements or given a negative level for the weapon's alignment opposing the weilder's (Good character can use Unholy/Pure Evil greensteel with no UMD or neg levels).


would they have to make a different storyline for the evil players?

No.


or would it just restrict some of the quests that you would be able to do, aka, Silver Flame quests......would they make it so that true neutral players could do a certain amount of "good aligned" quests and a certain amount of "evil aligned" quests.......would they have to make an entirely new favor Patron?? or just alter the alignment system so that by doing certain quests your alignment can shift......

No.


Evil alignments should have been an option from the very beginning for DDO. Including them now would correct this Dev oversight.

[Beethoven]

No.


No, as long as you ignore the storyline where your evil characters selflessly assist the forces of good to save Stormreach from evil (as opposed to selfishly use the situation for own gain), no changes would be needed.

Changes to quests would not be needed as long as you are fine disregarding the bit where those evil toons assist the fine citizens of the city for minor compensation.

Rule-wise you just would need to ignore the part where Paladins loose their powers if traveling with evil characters, or simply remove all special abilities from the Paladin class as odds are they group(ed) with an evil toon the one time or other.

Yes. It'd been a great idea to include giving certain toons an advantage over all other (immunity to unholy/evil attacks) based on alignment without sense or reason (given the actual storyline) and either ignore rules or completely cripple an entire class.

Including evil as alignment would probably do more harm then good - at the very least they would need to change the story/background of most quests to something more neutral where characters choose to accept either of goodness of their heart or for wholly selfish gain. Given the current loot tables, selfish gain would be likely to feel slightly ridiculous.

Evil alignments should have been an option from the very beginning for DDO. Including them now would correct this Dev oversight.[/QUOTE]

[Therilith]

I wouldn't mind them simply enabling evil alignment. Roleplayers could RP their own reasons for helping people and non-RPers wouldn't care and would simply pick alignment based on whatever criteria is currently used to decide between good/neutral and lawful/neutral/chaotic.

Considering some of the quests we do for the Flame, allowing evil PCs isn't exactly unthinkable.

If high level alignment-based spells and weapons need any tweaking it wouldn't exactly be a priority though.

[noopzilla]

hur dur im so afraid of people acting like jerks and i just can't handle it so much that i will sacrifice and even object to consistency within the d&d universe in which this game was based

it's disappointing that developers cater to spoiled princes and princesses who have nothing better to worry about than who's going to 'grief' and 'scam' them of their virtual dollars and virtual equipment in a virtual world.

stop being so dramatic about your online life that's apparently SOO SERIOUS and lighten the hell up :rolleyes:

and to contribute to the topic at hand, of course there should be evil alignments. it's in d&d, it should be in ddo.

[Bacab]

It would be nice.

I for example play a Racist Human that really dislikes Elves (normal and drow). I mean like every WF is racist towards "Fleshies", but when I make fun of pointy eared elves and their skinny arms...I also ask things like do you have triple digit HP yet? And stuff like that.

It is kinda fun tbh being racist in game.

As far as a way to ensure people do not grief with the "Evil" alignments...Make it so you have to buy or earn (2500 Favor) Evil Alignment. If you allow F2P or even brand new accounts to have access to Evil alignment; you are asking for problems. Also make someone "read and sign(click)" an agreement that they understand what is in ToA and ToS for this game and understand that griefing will not be tolerated.

Though if you allow "Evil Alignment" you should still require "cleansing" for Greensteel weapons.

[Uska]

it's disappointing that developers cater to spoiled princes and princesses who have nothing better to worry about than who's going to 'grief' and 'scam' them of their virtual dollars and virtual equipment in a virtual world.

stop being so dramatic about your online life that's apparently SOO SERIOUS and lighten the hell up :rolleyes:

and to contribute to the topic at hand, of course there should be evil alignments. it's in d&d, it should be in ddo.

I know few good gms who allowed it most didnt just to keep peace in the game yes it was in the game but discouraged

[bobbryan2]

I would enjoy it more for some interesting item enhancements... but with the complete lack of good aligned enemies, evil enhancements wouldn't do much in this game.

Expand the amount of neutral and good enemies, and evil alignments will follow. Otherwise... not much chance.

[Kyrn]

Just to pipe in:

I know that deity alignments doesn't correspond to player alignments, but we do have clerics/paladins/favored souls following a lawful evil deity. (Lord of the Blades)

And just because players play an evil alignment doesn't mean the definition of evil is definitively kicking puppies and griefing people.

I'd think there comes a time when evil has to play smart. After all, there is no world to rule if Xoriat consumes it, or devils invade it, or etc...

[FarOutFish]

The reality is Evil characters just are not going to be supported. It has nothing to do with the game, its balance or anything we can do about it. :confused:

The original Dungeons and Dragons Monster Manual had named Demons, which was OK as long as the game was virtually unknown, however as soon as the game became popular members of “The Finger Pointing Society”:eek: complained the game was a Satanist :mad: manual. The forces for GOOD:D in the community called for a boycott of the game and produced a movie, “Mazes and Monsters” :(showing a similar game leading to a players suicide. The heat was on and the release of Advanced D&D solved the problem by removing all the Demons, Devils and their ilk from the new Monster Manual.:(

Now imagine :rolleyes: the uproar and brouhaha the introduction of Evil character players in the game.:confused: It could change the games rating for more mature players. The fhit :eek: would hit the san, :eek: something Turbine would do anything to avoid

:p Whine, complain and *****. It won’t do any good. There are enough critics out there to stop the play of Evil characters. And that’s the Way it is. :eek:

[Dendrix]

is it just me or does anybody else think that they should have the chotic evil alignment available???.....or any evil alignments for that matter.

No. Players would use it as a justification for acting like Richards.

(p.s. what's the shortened forM of Richard)

[Gremmlynn]

No. Players would use it as a justification for acting like Richards.

(p.s. what's the shortened forM of Richard)Like ****s need any justification.

Frankly, with as much trouble as this game has gone through to protect players from each other, I don't see why anyone would think a change like this would make a difference in that department.

PR-wise on the other hand, it would probably be a bad move.

[PopeJual]

If most everybody could be cool about it, then Evil characters would be fine. Unfortunately, too many people would not be cool about it and would use it as an excuse to "RP" Chaotic @ss****.


I've had a wholloping good time playing a Lawful Evil character in a pen&paper D&D campaign and for the longest time, my party members didn't know I was Evil. They knew that I was more interested in loot and XP and power than in saving the innocent for the innocents' sake, but they thought I was just powergaming. It wasn't until we were level 7 and ran across a Paladin (rare in that campaign) that they found out I was LE.

He still did more good for the "forces of good" in his own self interest than many Good characters did over the course of their careers.

[MrkGrismer]

The heat was on and the release of Advanced D&D solved the problem by removing all the Demons, Devils and their ilk from the new Monster Manual.:(

Uhm, my AD&D Monster Manual has all that stuff in it. Also 3.0 Book of Vile Darkness has all that stuff in it.


As for the topic, the problem with allowing Chaotic Evil alignments is too many people seem to think a character that is Chaotic Evil would be the type to bring up their MS-DOS prompt and type "format c:" for giggles.

[dunklezhan]

Uhm, my AD&D Monster Manual has all that stuff in it. Also 3.0 Book of Vile Darkness has all that stuff in it.


Don't know about the monster manual. But I DO remember all the brouhaha about the BoVD. That very nearly broke Wizards OT Coast completely. Threatened lawsuits, product boycotts, the works.

I applauded them for bringing it out and sticking with it, personally, but it was very close there for a while.

And you've only to look at everytime some psycho makes the news and they find that they had D&D books -any D&D books - in their house, to see that bringing any attention to the game which the holier-than-thou bigot brigade might consider 'bad' could cause real problems.

And that's before we get into what certain players may or may not do if they think they've been licensed to act like idiots.

In the various PnP campaigns I've played, I've seen plenty of people try to play evil. With one exception, it was highly detrimental to the campaign. And these were experienced, keen roleplayers who were all friends. When a bunch of strangers try it.. I shudder to think.

I'm generally in favour of freedom for this sort of thing. In this case, in this game, on this internetz ... more trouble than its worth I'm afraid.

IMHO.

[Eladiun]

Not to mention an 'evil alignment' would be just an excuse for ******s to grief other players. No reason to open the door imo.

So true... very few people who want evil alignments want them for RP. They just use them as an excuse to grief and steal.

[Fravas]

What if...

There were evil characters, but they're not able to group up in parties (because they're evil, duh).

And maybe we can stick them all on an island, or some small city where they could PvP with each other all day long, and level up through their kills.

And maybe the city could be a dungeon for good player-parties to go to and kill them all in.


Oh, and the Book of Vile Darkness was one of the best books WotC ever released. I still read parts of it today because it's so **** awesome, and recommend it to everyone who can stare in the face of evil and say, "awesome..."

[PopeJual]

And maybe the city could be a dungeon for good player-parties to go to and kill them all in.

You can't kill someone just because they're evil.

If that were true, how would we keep any of our Presidents for their full four year term, much less see any reelected?

[Kyrn]

What if...

There were evil characters, but they're not able to group up in parties (because they're evil, duh).

And maybe we can stick them all on an island, or some small city where they could PvP with each other all day long, and level up through their kills.

And maybe the city could be a dungeon for good player-parties to go to and kill them all in.


Oh, and the Book of Vile Darkness was one of the best books WotC ever released. I still read parts of it today because it's so **** awesome, and recommend it to everyone who can stare in the face of evil and say, "awesome..."

1) Evil characters being unable to group doesn't make sense, since barbarians can group with monks/paladins.
2) There are already quests which we solicit help from evil-aligned characters. Necropolis 4 serves as an example where all 4 significant alignments (no neutral) are solicited to take down a greater issue. (for that matter, it would make more sense for the character of the right alignment to be answering the questions to go to each individual boss fight in litany of the dead...)
3) There are already paladins, clerics, and favored souls working for a lawful-evil deity. (and on that note, forcing paladins to be lawful good doesn't quite make sense, though paladins are likely not to be lawful-neutral regardless..)
4) Lawful-evil characters don't necessarily PvP: Chaotic characters are more likely to PvP, regardless of good/evil alignment. (and naturally opposing alignments would be more likely to PvP, but since you separated good and evil...)

But seriously though, in terms of story flavour, there should be some way for those serving the Lord of Blades to shift their alignment to evil. I'm thinking of something like a 2500 favor reward, where because of your character's heavy development and experiences, they find their own alignments shifted from what their initial beliefs were...

[AfroDesiac]

You can't kill someone just because they're evil.

If that were true, how would we keep any of our Presidents for their full four year term, much less see any reelected?


They have **** good bodyguards. I believe they are called the Secret Service.

[Amberyll]

DDO followed the D&D 3.0 and 3.5 rules on this, which followed later 2nd edition rules. PC's are not allowed to be evil.
Now, based on how toon's are played, I think this is a pointless discussion. The only change between an evil vs good toon, in game, would be what gives increased and decreased damage.
Now, if you are arguing that players should be able to murder/rob/etc. others (pc's and npc's), then you would be altering DDO beyond recognition. Currently, we can attack most npc's in quests, which we then loot through chests and end rewards. And we can fight and kill other pc's in PvP areas, without any ability to loot, or lose equipment. Arguing for this change would alter the game from what it is into something else.
I personally see this as a pointless exercise, and have many other facets I would prefer the dev's to work on, like content already mentioned earlier.

[Garbudo]

Holy weapons would give such players a negative level, and they would have to UMD Pure Good weapons. For high level gameplay, however, neither of these things would matter--Greensteel weapons have never had UMD requirements or given a negative level for the weapon's alignment opposing the weilder's (Good character can use Unholy/Pure Evil greensteel with no UMD or neg levels).



No a Lawful Good Paladin will take a Negative Level for using a Green Steel Unholy, Unholy burst , Unholy blast, Slay living Weapon I know this because I have on on my Paladin. "The Item has a Taint of Evil, therefore you are Bestowed 1 Negative Level until the Item is Removed"

[Kyrn]

DDO followed the D&D 3.0 and 3.5 rules on this, which followed later 2nd edition rules. PC's are not allowed to be evil.
Now, based on how toon's are played, I think this is a pointless discussion. The only change between an evil vs good toon, in game, would be what gives increased and decreased damage.
Now, if you are arguing that players should be able to murder/rob/etc. others (pc's and npc's), then you would be altering DDO beyond recognition. Currently, we can attack most npc's in quests, which we then loot through chests and end rewards. And we can fight and kill other pc's in PvP areas, without any ability to loot, or lose equipment. Arguing for this change would alter the game from what it is into something else.
I personally see this as a pointless exercise, and have many other facets I would prefer the dev's to work on, like content already mentioned earlier.

I can't find any evidence of such restrictions. What I did find is http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Alignment_%28Dungeons_&_Dragons%29 where it says "Under 2nd Edition AD&D rules, a character who performed too many actions outside of his alignment could find their alignment changed, with penalties requiring more experience to be gained to reach the next level. In third edition D&D this restriction is removed and players are technically allowed to change alignment freely." the closest thing to alignment restrictions I see. Additionally, I do find some evil-aligned PC prestige classes (which are presumably adjusted for the eberron settings) such as assassin.

[Folonius]

The reality is Evil characters just are not going to be supported. It has nothing to do with the game, its balance or anything we can do about it. :confused:

The original Dungeons and Dragons Monster Manual had named Demons, which was OK as long as the game was virtually unknown, however as soon as the game became popular members of “The Finger Pointing Society”:eek: complained the game was a Satanist :mad: manual. The forces for GOOD:D in the community called for a boycott of the game and produced a movie, “Mazes and Monsters” :(showing a similar game leading to a players suicide. The heat was on and the release of Advanced D&D solved the problem by removing all the Demons, Devils and their ilk from the new Monster Manual.:(

Now imagine :rolleyes: the uproar and brouhaha the introduction of Evil character players in the game.:confused: It could change the games rating for more mature players. The fhit :eek: would hit the san, :eek: something Turbine would do anything to avoid

:p Whine, complain and *****. It won’t do any good. There are enough critics out there to stop the play of Evil characters. And that’s the Way it is. :eek:

I just came from playing the MMO Co*

City of Heroes
and
City of VILLIANS

No uproar about that. I see no reason for DDO to not make an opposing area for villian characters. They can gear the quests towards gaining power. Being evil can be genericized.

IMO it's feasible, but probably not plausable. If they started working on it now, it might be here in 5 years and would have to give it some character classes that would attract people to play. Maybe a half demon race or some-such thing.

[Uska]

DDO followed the D&D 3.0 and 3.5 rules on this, which followed later 2nd edition rules. PC's are not allowed to be evil.
Now, based on how toon's are played, I think this is a pointless discussion. The only change between an evil vs good toon, in game, would be what gives increased and decreased damage.
Now, if you are arguing that players should be able to murder/rob/etc. others (pc's and npc's), then you would be altering DDO beyond recognition. Currently, we can attack most npc's in quests, which we then loot through chests and end rewards. And we can fight and kill other pc's in PvP areas, without any ability to loot, or lose equipment. Arguing for this change would alter the game from what it is into something else.
I personally see this as a pointless exercise, and have many other facets I would prefer the dev's to work on, like content already mentioned earlier.

There was no rule against players being evil it was just discouraged in a place or two, it was one of the reasons they removed the assassian when 2nd edition came out of course they added it back in with 3.x evil for pc's is just generaly a bad idea.

[MrkGrismer]

The biggest problem I've always had with evil PCs in a PnP game was the idea of evil PCs in a 'generally good' world.

Now, if the PCs are evil then they should probably be in a 'generally evil' world. That would be one where all the higher level NPCs and such are also evil, the society is evil, and the PCs and everybody are heavily oppressed. It sounds like a pretty darn dangerous world to me, and one without high survivability.

Could you imagine playing in a world where everybody has to be constantly looking over there shoulder and expecting people to take advantage of them, steal from them, or try killing them to take their stuff?

[Fravas]

1) Evil characters being unable to group doesn't make sense, since barbarians can group with monks/paladins.
2) There are already quests which we solicit help from evil-aligned characters. Necropolis 4 serves as an example where all 4 significant alignments (no neutral) are solicited to take down a greater issue. (for that matter, it would make more sense for the character of the right alignment to be answering the questions to go to each individual boss fight in litany of the dead...)
3) There are already paladins, clerics, and favored souls working for a lawful-evil deity. (and on that note, forcing paladins to be lawful good doesn't quite make sense, though paladins are likely not to be lawful-neutral regardless..)
4) Lawful-evil characters don't necessarily PvP: Chaotic characters are more likely to PvP, regardless of good/evil alignment. (and naturally opposing alignments would be more likely to PvP, but since you separated good and evil...)

But seriously though, in terms of story flavour, there should be some way for those serving the Lord of Blades to shift their alignment to evil. I'm thinking of something like a 2500 favor reward, where because of your character's heavy development and experiences, they find their own alignments shifted from what their initial beliefs were...

Aww :(

[Gremmlynn]

Could you imagine playing in a world where everybody has to be constantly looking over there shoulder and expecting people to take advantage of them, steal from them, or try killing them to take their stuff?Um, yes I can. I played Shadowbane for 6 years and loved it (though you would have to add burn your city and laugh at you on the forums to your list for SB to qualify).

[AfroDesiac]

The biggest problem I've always had with evil PCs in a PnP game was the idea of evil PCs in a 'generally good' world.

Now, if the PCs are evil then they should probably be in a 'generally evil' world. That would be one where all the higher level NPCs and such are also evil, the society is evil, and the PCs and everybody are heavily oppressed. It sounds like a pretty darn dangerous world to me, and one without high survivability.

Could you imagine playing in a world where everybody has to be constantly looking over there shoulder and expecting people to take advantage of them, steal from them, or try killing them to take their stuff?


You just described REAL LIFE. Of course society isn't entirely evil, but any world, fantasy or otherwise, that is even slightly realistic will have a measure of all "alignments."

Do I believe evil alignments will be added to DDO? No I don't.

Do I believe adding evil alignments would hurt the game? Again, no I don't.

In reality good and evil have no inherent meaning, even less so in a video game. In a role playing game the terms good and evil are primarily used as shorthand for selflessness and selfishness. IF character alignments were based on how people played a LOT of characters in DDO would be evil aligned (at least from my experience).

[MrkGrismer]

You just described REAL LIFE. Of course society isn't entirely evil, but any world, fantasy or otherwise, that is even slightly realistic will have a measure of all "alignments."

Do I believe evil alignments will be added to DDO? No I don't.

Do I believe adding evil alignments would hurt the game? Again, no I don't.

In reality good and evil have no inherent meaning, even less so in a video game. In a role playing game the terms good and evil are primarily used as shorthand for selflessness and selfishness. IF character alignments were based on how people played a LOT of characters in DDO would be evil aligned (at least from my experience).

It is a matter of degrees. In real life the majority of people are not trying to kill each other and steal their stuff. In an 'evil' society (by D&D alignments) people that don't want to kill you and take your stuff would be in the minority. Especially in a 'chaotic evil' society. There would be no laws and no respect for life at all. If you aren't strong/powerful enough to protect yourself and those things you care about then somebody else who is more powerful will take them from you.

[Jasimine]

Personally the only reason I can see for them to not have evil alignments is due to ESRB rating. If you look at any game in which you play an anti-hero the ratings for that game tend to be one notch higher than a similar game were you play a regular stock I'm the good guy hero. By raising their ESRB they would in turn loose customers. I actually have met a few parents who play in game that have said their children have accounts and if there were evil alignments they would not allow their children to play. Why? They don't want their kids learning to be the bad guy. They want them being the good guys. That in and of itself is the only reason I can see for Turbine to not have evil alignments.

However I personally would love them. But I would also like to see a few changes made to the game if they put in evil alignments.

1. Enforce the one step alignment restrictions based on diety. No more paladins of the lord of blades (he's LE after all). Assassins would need to be evil alignment. Palemasters cannot be good Etc.

2. Adjust the quest taking speeches in a few places to recognize the characters alignment and give an alternate conversation based on good/neutral vs evil. The quest itself would remain unchanged but instead of doing something for the sake of doing good you would do it for cash. Really alot of the quests already sound very much along those lines.

3. Add a few new quests down the road were you need to raid the forces of good. Lets face it, even a good aligned group might be about to do something totally and irrecoverably stupid. Either planning some ritual that would wipe out all of X species believing genocide to be for the greater good or they have a corrupt leader that is using their zealotry to twist them into doing something that is bad for the whole of society in the name of the greater good.

These could all be things that could be added slowly to the game, step by step. The hardest, and perhaps most unfeasible of these changes would be the alignment restrictions on classes. It would take some work to tag existing characters to grandfather them in but meh. Toss that out if they can't do it.

Evil alignments could add additional fun I think. As for the twits that would take it as an excuse to grief, players have long memories. If someone is a greedy, selfish, idiot we will remember them and not group with that person. If they are going above and beyond to actually grief, report him and Turbine can handle it. I'm sure they would make it very clear very quickly that evil does not mean a liscense to grief.

[gavagai]

1. Enforce the one step alignment restrictions based on diety. No more paladins of the lord of blades (he's LE after all). Assassins would need to be evil alignment. Palemasters cannot be good Etc.

(snip)


The one critical challenge is that Turbine would have to implement so much from the moment they release Evil alignments, just to justify having evil alignments. They, in essence, have to redesign how alignments work, and then start balancing items, enemies, quests, and even classes accordingly. Otherwise, the evil alignment will end up like most of the current alignments: traps for new players.

Evil would simply add another layer of exclusions for parties, builds, and playstyles; and then Turbine would need to create content so those alignment restrictions weren't so heavily excluding. (Dark Paladins, good Assassins, Good Dragons and evil Armor sets, &c.)

I would rather not have all that effort dedicated to giving us pretty much what we have now but with a little more alignment flavor.

And this coming from a fan of Shadowbane, which was based on open-field ganking and guild-versus-guild predation. DDO is about a broad and relatively harmonious community, with diverse build and party styles. I suspect adding a robust Evil/Alignment System would lead Turbine to focus efforts more on a kind of balancing that would necessarily separate the community.

[Failedlegend]

I'd like evil alignments and the corresponding quests/storylines, but that would be a huge change to the game, which means a lot of dev time. And since generally only a minority of players would like to play evil, they probably won't consider it.

Not to mention the best alignment is True neutral for DDO IMHO (if you have good UMD) the only time I choose a different one if on Pally's or monks or if UMD is not planned

[ddaedelus]

There are plenty of chaotic evil players. No need for the alignment.

Oh wait. I'm confusing real life and the game again. :(