Well, if there is one thing clear, its that WotC made right decision, when they decided to remove Alignments ...
People clearly dont understand the concept very well.
This 100%. It just seems like an outdated concept imo. Some people see it as set in stone, some as dynamic, some treat it as the absolute core of a character, some just as tendencies or whatever. It just gets in the way of a more nuanced characterization. I say good riddance, we don't need alignment anymore. Really happy that both DND and Pathfinder move away from it.
It's not just outdated, it's dangerous. You see people using the AD&D alignment system to judge people in the real world.
People use a lot of things to judge people in the real world. This strikes me as dangerously close to the "violence in video games leads to real world violence" argument.
If the alignment system was unclear, then it could have been made more clear instead of simply being removed. A world where the Good and Evil are explicitly associated with certain planes of existence/gods, defines certain creatures (e.g., devils and demons are by definition evil), and can be used to cover the majority of certain creatures' tendencies (mind flayers and goblins are *generally evil, gnomes and halflings are *generally good, githyanki are *generally lawful, etc) can be both useful and interesting. I think D&D will be lesser for their removal, if simply because we've lost word defintion that isn't, afaik, being replaced with anything.
