A good replacement for alignment [Archive] - Wizards Community

A good replacement for alignment [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
JimProfit
11-01-07, 07:08 PM Instead of those haphazard alignments nobody seems to like. Why not just replace them with the five colors of magic the gathering?

Black is generaly seen as the "evil" color, it's selfish, it's brutal, it thinks very little of eachother. But it's also strong, independant, resourceful, and cunning.

Blue is the lawful neutral, very jaded and intillectual, political and controlling.

Green the druid alignment. It can be good or evil, or some sortof neutral, because nature is unpredictable. They can be about creating and preserving life, or senseless destruction with respect for nature.

Red is the chaotic alignments. It's primarily based on the destruction, chaos, and self-expression. Red's done some good things, because they're generaly emotional and thus can be driven for just causes. They're just crazy.

White is the "good" alignment. Selfless, valiant, brave. They also tend to be just as if not more controlling then blue as an extension to keeping the peace.

Evidently you don't have to no longer be good/evil or lawful/chaotic. You now allocate mana points based on your thoughts, actions, and end-results to one of the five colors.

Who doesn't expect a wizard to be blue mana?
Or a paladin to be white?
Rogues are generaly black.
Barbarians red.
Druids green.

Not to say you have to use the "be this alignment or lose abilities" crap. But it allows for much more customization of personality with less arguments about how X wouldn't do that. As generaly the flavor of magic can be agreed upon to do there being a diverse number of colors that don't have to contradict one another.

Red tends to be allies with green/black. Black generaly doesn't try to styfel red, and green understands that happyness comes from internal, not external things.

Black gets along with red/blue because black sees them as the most easily exploitable to acheive selfish ends.

Blue gets along with black/white because they're generaly the most prone to a collectivist state based on logic and reason.

White gets along with green/blue for nobility reasons.

Green gets along with white/red because they understand the importance of thier values.

If we go by this,

Goblins/Dwarves: Generaly red
Elves/Gnomes: Generaly green
Merfolk/Hafling: Generaly blue (course how often you gonna find a merfolk?)
Orcs/Kobold: Generaly black
Humans: Generaly white (why do you think in second edition only humans could be paladins???)
Seeker95
11-01-07, 08:39 PM Replacing "color X" for "Alignment X" does not change anything but the name of the mechanic that people will argue about.
Kadasbrass
11-01-07, 09:03 PM Yeah your still going to have problems with any "alignment" replacement problems. With magic you run into those who are more then one "color".

Generally the best method of alignments is to focus more on one alignment over the other. such as in the case of a LG person, focus more on good or lawful as opposed to being both. Generally the easiest method is the old "good vs evil" only method.

Or could just down play alignments in general. Don't have players fill it out on their sheets, remove any alignment detection abilities/spells. Instead of alignments being something that is divinely determined it becomes more easier to argue what they are without there being a definate answer (aka no "Your evil and I can prove it. DETECT EVIL! See your evil."

Also, being alignment X isn't a crime. Just because a paladin can go "detect evil" doesn't mean he goes forth and go "Sir your under arrest because I can detect your alignment. If you just follow me we can take you in without any need for bloodshed because I will kill you for being evil."

Another method may be to use taint from Heroes of Hero in the place of or in addition to alignments.
JulesCARV
11-01-07, 09:35 PM My year-old proposal is obligation ratings (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=692478), which is a system which has a vague resemblance to the Vampire humanity/path system, except that each path is very narrow in its purview, and people are considered to be on all paths simultaneously rather than just one (although they might have high ratings in some and low ratings in others). If you were using it to replace alignment, and not merely augment it, then you might say things like "clerics of Pelor must have at least 1 in each of the standard obligation ratings, and must have a 2 or higher in the "Protection of Civilians," "Charity," and "Opposition to Evil Forces" obligation ratings," instead of "clerics of Pelor can be of any good alignment." It'd quite a bit of work, but it could be cool. (You might also make finer-grained distinctions among religions this way: for instance, compared to Pelor, Ehlonna might put a lower priority on "Opposition to Evil Forces," but make more stringent demands on "Animal Welfare" or "Nonviolence.")
JulesCARV
11-01-07, 11:28 PM Alternatively, you could conceive of the world as being dominated by a struggle between the eternal elements of hot, cold, spooky, stench, and sleaze. A succubus, being supremely sleaze-aligned, would be helpless against a spooky-aligned lich or a cold-aligned gelugon, but would be very effective against a stench-aligned otyugh or a hot-aligned magmin.
Someone
11-02-07, 02:25 AM Alternatively, you could conceive of the world as being dominated by a struggle between the eternal elements of hot, cold, spooky, stench, and sleaze. A succubus, being supremely sleaze-aligned, would be helpless against a spooky-aligned lich or a cold-aligned gelugon, but would be very effective against a stench-aligned otyugh or a hot-aligned magmin.I'm pretty sure rock would beat the hell out of scissors in that system. Paper, not so much :D

Rock = lawful; "like a rock".
Scissors = evil; "don't run with scissors".
Paper = good; "looked good on paper".
Escef
11-02-07, 01:27 PM How about Taint? (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/unearthedTaint.html)
Rustmonster
11-02-07, 07:14 PM Alternatively, you could conceive of the world as being dominated by a struggle between the eternal elements of hot, cold, spooky, stench, and sleaze. A succubus, being supremely sleaze-aligned, would be helpless against a spooky-aligned lich or a cold-aligned gelugon, but would be very effective against a stench-aligned otyugh or a hot-aligned magmin.

This reference wins you a box of gift certificates. :gift:

Good show.
taradusis
11-02-07, 10:38 PM Personally I like the allegiance system from D20 modern,I would remove the standard alignment axis from that and just allow PCs to be devoted to what they want?
Kojiro James
11-03-07, 12:49 AM Like many have already pointed out, any "replacement" would just be alignment in funny hats.
Scribbler
11-03-07, 02:35 PM Your solution to people complaining about choosing from nine general categories is to have them pick from five specific categories that connect them to weird things?
annoyinglizardvoice
11-05-07, 04:11 PM In my games I use the honor, alliegence and corruption rules from the Conan books. Varying codes of honor can be used to take into account of the different vues created by the backgrounds of characters. Alliegence helps determine what sort of people they would be likely to work with and get along well with. Corruption marks out characters who have become overtly evil or tainted so that PCs know when they have fallen and so that paladins have something to smite. Neutral characters might not have any of these things.
Mindolin
11-05-07, 04:44 PM Another idea is to use what D20 Modern uses, where you choose three allegiances, and have them roleplay according to that.
Dog_O_War
11-05-07, 04:51 PM I will direct you to another poster's campaign setting, Avayevnon - by Seraphine_Harmonium.

It is (currently) the fifth post from the bottom on the second page. It has big bold letters entitled Astrology in quotation text.

He has a very good grasp on the rules and balance. It may take some reading, but there is a good system there.

EDIT: forgot to link it; http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=721255&page=2

Bullplop.
pres_man
11-05-07, 04:52 PM How about which Hogwarts' house would they be sorted into?

Sorry, my wife is a big Potter fan.
echelon_house
11-05-07, 05:13 PM As a long-time Magic player, I actually think switching to the color system would be a very good idea. The problem with the alignment system (as I see it) is that it is extremely limited. There aren't nine discrete options to pick from; there is essentially a good-evil axis and a chaotic-orderly axis, and you choose your positions on them. But the entire idea of a strict good/evil dichotomy is nonsensical and unnecissarily limiting to the game as a whole, and the chaos/order axis has always struck me as a very arbitrary choice. Why not have a nice/mean axis, or a gloomy/happy axis? It would be about as meaningful.
The color system, on the other hand, offers five different life philosophies for players to choose from. Each one is extremely diverse and covers a wide range of issues while allowing a character belonging to any color to be good or evil. Unfortunately, the OP did not explain the colors very well and made them sound like nothing more than the alignment system renamed. For anyone genuinely interested in learning more about the various colors, I would strongly suggest reading Mark Rosewater's articles, the last of which is linked here, and contains links to sixteen other articles covering all five of the colors, all ten possible color combinations, and colorlessness. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr241

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
JimProfit 11-01-07, 07:08 PM	Instead of those haphazard alignments nobody seems to like. Why not just replace them with the five colors of magic the gathering? Black is generaly seen as the "evil" color, it's selfish, it's brutal, it thinks very little of eachother. But it's also strong, independant, resourceful, and cunning. Blue is the lawful neutral, very jaded and intillectual, political and controlling. Green the druid alignment. It can be good or evil, or some sortof neutral, because nature is unpredictable. They can be about creating and preserving life, or senseless destruction with respect for nature. Red is the chaotic alignments. It's primarily based on the destruction, chaos, and self-expression. Red's done some good things, because they're generaly emotional and thus can be driven for just causes. They're just crazy. White is the "good" alignment. Selfless, valiant, brave. They also tend to be just as if not more controlling then blue as an extension to keeping the peace. Evidently you don't have to no longer be good/evil or lawful/chaotic. You now allocate mana points based on your thoughts, actions, and end-results to one of the five colors. Who doesn't expect a wizard to be blue mana? Or a paladin to be white? Rogues are generaly black. Barbarians red. Druids green. Not to say you have to use the "be this alignment or lose abilities" crap. But it allows for much more customization of personality with less arguments about how X wouldn't do that. As generaly the flavor of magic can be agreed upon to do there being a diverse number of colors that don't have to contradict one another. Red tends to be allies with green/black. Black generaly doesn't try to styfel red, and green understands that happyness comes from internal, not external things. Black gets along with red/blue because black sees them as the most easily exploitable to acheive selfish ends. Blue gets along with black/white because they're generaly the most prone to a collectivist state based on logic and reason. White gets along with green/blue for nobility reasons. Green gets along with white/red because they understand the importance of thier values. If we go by this, Goblins/Dwarves: Generaly red Elves/Gnomes: Generaly green Merfolk/Hafling: Generaly blue (course how often you gonna find a merfolk?) Orcs/Kobold: Generaly black Humans: Generaly white (why do you think in second edition only humans could be paladins???)
Seeker95 11-01-07, 08:39 PM	Replacing "color X" for "Alignment X" does not change anything but the name of the mechanic that people will argue about.
Kadasbrass 11-01-07, 09:03 PM	Yeah your still going to have problems with any "alignment" replacement problems. With magic you run into those who are more then one "color". Generally the best method of alignments is to focus more on one alignment over the other. such as in the case of a LG person, focus more on good or lawful as opposed to being both. Generally the easiest method is the old "good vs evil" only method. Or could just down play alignments in general. Don't have players fill it out on their sheets, remove any alignment detection abilities/spells. Instead of alignments being something that is divinely determined it becomes more easier to argue what they are without there being a definate answer (aka no "Your evil and I can prove it. DETECT EVIL! See your evil." Also, being alignment X isn't a crime. Just because a paladin can go "detect evil" doesn't mean he goes forth and go "Sir your under arrest because I can detect your alignment. If you just follow me we can take you in without any need for bloodshed because I will kill you for being evil." Another method may be to use taint from Heroes of Hero in the place of or in addition to alignments.
JulesCARV 11-01-07, 09:35 PM	My year-old proposal is obligation ratings (http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=692478), which is a system which has a vague resemblance to the Vampire humanity/path system, except that each path is very narrow in its purview, and people are considered to be on all paths simultaneously rather than just one (although they might have high ratings in some and low ratings in others). If you were using it to replace alignment, and not merely augment it, then you might say things like "clerics of Pelor must have at least 1 in each of the standard obligation ratings, and must have a 2 or higher in the "Protection of Civilians," "Charity," and "Opposition to Evil Forces" obligation ratings," instead of "clerics of Pelor can be of any good alignment." It'd quite a bit of work, but it could be cool. (You might also make finer-grained distinctions among religions this way: for instance, compared to Pelor, Ehlonna might put a lower priority on "Opposition to Evil Forces," but make more stringent demands on "Animal Welfare" or "Nonviolence.")
JulesCARV 11-01-07, 11:28 PM	Alternatively, you could conceive of the world as being dominated by a struggle between the eternal elements of hot, cold, spooky, stench, and sleaze. A succubus, being supremely sleaze-aligned, would be helpless against a spooky-aligned lich or a cold-aligned gelugon, but would be very effective against a stench-aligned otyugh or a hot-aligned magmin.
Someone 11-02-07, 02:25 AM	Alternatively, you could conceive of the world as being dominated by a struggle between the eternal elements of hot, cold, spooky, stench, and sleaze. A succubus, being supremely sleaze-aligned, would be helpless against a spooky-aligned lich or a cold-aligned gelugon, but would be very effective against a stench-aligned otyugh or a hot-aligned magmin.I'm pretty sure rock would beat the hell out of scissors in that system. Paper, not so much :D Rock = lawful; "like a rock". Scissors = evil; "don't run with scissors". Paper = good; "looked good on paper".
Escef 11-02-07, 01:27 PM	How about Taint? (http://www.systemreferencedocuments.org/35/sovelior_sage/unearthedTaint.html)
Rustmonster 11-02-07, 07:14 PM	Alternatively, you could conceive of the world as being dominated by a struggle between the eternal elements of hot, cold, spooky, stench, and sleaze. A succubus, being supremely sleaze-aligned, would be helpless against a spooky-aligned lich or a cold-aligned gelugon, but would be very effective against a stench-aligned otyugh or a hot-aligned magmin. This reference wins you a box of gift certificates. :gift: Good show.
taradusis 11-02-07, 10:38 PM	Personally I like the allegiance system from D20 modern,I would remove the standard alignment axis from that and just allow PCs to be devoted to what they want?
Kojiro James 11-03-07, 12:49 AM	Like many have already pointed out, any "replacement" would just be alignment in funny hats.
Scribbler 11-03-07, 02:35 PM	Your solution to people complaining about choosing from nine general categories is to have them pick from five specific categories that connect them to weird things?
annoyinglizardvoice 11-05-07, 04:11 PM	In my games I use the honor, alliegence and corruption rules from the Conan books. Varying codes of honor can be used to take into account of the different vues created by the backgrounds of characters. Alliegence helps determine what sort of people they would be likely to work with and get along well with. Corruption marks out characters who have become overtly evil or tainted so that PCs know when they have fallen and so that paladins have something to smite. Neutral characters might not have any of these things.
Mindolin 11-05-07, 04:44 PM	Another idea is to use what D20 Modern uses, where you choose three allegiances, and have them roleplay according to that.
Dog_O_War 11-05-07, 04:51 PM	I will direct you to another poster's campaign setting, Avayevnon - by Seraphine_Harmonium. It is (currently) the fifth post from the bottom on the second page. It has big bold letters entitled Astrology in quotation text. He has a very good grasp on the rules and balance. It may take some reading, but there is a good system there. EDIT: forgot to link it; http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=721255&page=2 Bullplop.
pres_man 11-05-07, 04:52 PM	How about which Hogwarts' house would they be sorted into? Sorry, my wife is a big Potter fan.
echelon_house 11-05-07, 05:13 PM	As a long-time Magic player, I actually think switching to the color system would be a very good idea. The problem with the alignment system (as I see it) is that it is extremely limited. There aren't nine discrete options to pick from; there is essentially a good-evil axis and a chaotic-orderly axis, and you choose your positions on them. But the entire idea of a strict good/evil dichotomy is nonsensical and unnecissarily limiting to the game as a whole, and the chaos/order axis has always struck me as a very arbitrary choice. Why not have a nice/mean axis, or a gloomy/happy axis? It would be about as meaningful. The color system, on the other hand, offers five different life philosophies for players to choose from. Each one is extremely diverse and covers a wide range of issues while allowing a character belonging to any color to be good or evil. Unfortunately, the OP did not explain the colors very well and made them sound like nothing more than the alignment system renamed. For anyone genuinely interested in learning more about the various colors, I would strongly suggest reading Mark Rosewater's articles, the last of which is linked here, and contains links to sixteen other articles covering all five of the colors, all ten possible color combinations, and colorlessness. http://www.wizards.com/default.asp?x=mtgcom/daily/mr241