Post/Author/DateTime	Post
markos 04-19-04, 04:09 PM	I know this is controversial, but I can't help it. D&D is far more interesting and challenging when all alignment rules are ignored. Yes, even so-called monsters would have no alignments. What I find is that it is liberating to not be bound by such an arbitrary framework. Just let the players play their characters as they see fit. Their natural habits will become clear, and maybe they'll have some off-character days, but so what? Something that I find fascinating is meeting up with a band of Orcs, let's say, and not knowing automatically how they'll react. I.e, they are no longer automatons. They now become real. Naturally it's your game, so play any way you like, but I just thought I'd share my thoughts on this. Just because Tolkien painted Orcs as always being somehow evil, doesn't really make it interesting. In fact, everything seems too predictable to me. Without alignments even playing first level characters becomes fascinating. Alignments to me seem to be artifical and constricting constructs that take away from the imaginative potential of role playing games. Enough said. I gotta get back to work...like the automaton I am.
StormKnight 04-19-04, 04:17 PM	I agree, its not neccessary - its an extremely artificial and very abstract concept which serves almost no in-game purpouse besides defining certain spells which could easily have other qualifiers. (Protection from <alignment> could instead be protection from outsider, protection from undead, protection from humans, etc) However, I don't feel your examples actually relates. A band of orcs in an alignment system can still be a mix of aligmnets. You can even meet a band of all good orcs. A band of orcs in a non-aligned system can still be a predictable group of psychotic bloodthirsting battle hungry critters. Without alignments even playing first level characters becomes fascinating. Is playing first level not normally fascinating? :confused:
Edymnion 04-19-04, 04:28 PM	Okay, it sounds like you don't understand how alignment works. Alignment does not tell you how a character acts, not directly. A Good character can go slaughter babies if they want to, there is nothing stopping them. Evil characters can like to pick flowers and sing to little children, there is nothing stopping them. Alignment is a thermometer, not a straightjacket. Alignment is an indicator of the character's outlook on life, and how they are to live it. When that outlook on life changes, so does alignment. Alignment should NEVER restrict your ability to roleplay, if you are using it correctly. People don't run around with their alignment printed on their foreheads. Unless you're running around casting Detect Alignment on everything that moves (in which case you better be a fast talker, because you're going to get into some real trouble real fast when people see you casting spells at them), you DON'T KNOW what somebody's alignment is. You cannot determine their alignment from limited interaction with the character. Lawful Evil characters can appear to be literally any other alignment in individual actions. So can Lawful Good. It is the predominance of one viewpoint over the others that says what the alignment finally settles on. Heck, I have seen incredibly good arguments on why Superman and Batman both are Lawful Good, and its rare that people would think that Superman and Batman are the same alignment. Let me say this again, alignment is not a straightjacket. If you are letting your alignment dictate your roleplaying instead of letting your roleplaying dictate your alignment, chances are that you're doing something wrong.
LordofIllusions 04-19-04, 04:37 PM	This guys rant sounds an awful lot like those rants by Gad. I guess I will have to ignore this one as well. ~~~
Zherog 04-19-04, 04:45 PM	Um, what Edy said. He covered everything I wanted to get to. Alginment shouldn't dictate your roleplaying; your roleplaying should dictate your alignment.
Roland the Crownbreaker 04-19-04, 06:08 PM	Alginment shouldn't dictate your roleplaying; your roleplaying should dictate your alignment. This is basically the heart of the matter. Most people I know who have a large problem with alignments have played under DMs who ignore this simple rule. Extreme situations can make someone go against thier nature. Confronted with innocents suffering in the extreme, someone who is normally completely selfish might show compassion. When a situation turns to the possible death (or actual death) of loved ones, even someone who can be described as saintly might do terrible things. To quote one of the editions books...... Alignment is a TOOL, not a straightjacket.
markos 04-19-04, 06:32 PM	Thank you Roland and Edy for the intelligent replies. You're absolutely right that I've always played with DM's who've used alignment as a straightjacket. In choosing an alignment we've had to follow it pretty much to the letter, or else we'd lose exp. points, etc. My objections to this style of playing have always been met with defensiveness. You're moderation in this regard is commendable. Thank you also for the quote regarding alignment as following behavior. People can forget that and put "the cart in front of the horse". Now I can point to this quote to back up my argument (hey, if it's written down it must be true ;-D).
Super Chris 04-19-04, 07:20 PM	Even monster alignments described in the monster manual aren't a straightjacket for the DM - you should make your monsters whatever alignment you feel is appropriate. Going back to the Orc example, for instance; Orcs in my campaign are predominantly neutral, and there are in fact more good Orcs than evil. It's a campaign flavor thing. Heck, I could even envision a world where Mind Flayers were lawful good rather than lawful evil. (I prefer the LE ones though :) ) The point is that alignments are guidelines, not rules.
Edymnion 04-19-04, 07:37 PM	Originally posted by markos You're absolutely right that I've always played with DM's who've used alignment as a straightjacket. In choosing an alignment we've had to follow it pretty much to the letter, or else we'd lose exp. points, etc. Ouch, do me a favor and smack your DM over the head with his own DMG and tell him to read the thing next time :P Originally posted by LordofIllusions This guys rant sounds an awful lot those rants by Gad. I guess I will have to ignore this one as well. If you're referring to who I think you're referring to, then thank you, its an honor. Tell him I said hi :)
Seeker95 04-19-04, 07:39 PM	To provide a variant on how alignment is presented in the rules... I don't allow my players to pick an alignment. Instead, they just play. (I start all my campaigns at first level.) When the characters are third level, I assign an alignment that most closely matches how they have played. If this imposes a class-based restriction, they can consider themselves "on probation" for one level. If the way they play their character is still not in accordance with the class requirements, tough. This way a player does not have to say "I'm alignment PQ. So I have to do XYZ." Instead, I as DM say "you have done XYZ under circumstances ABC. Your alignment is PQ." In my current campaign, the characters will be levelling up next session. Our "I wanna be true neutral" druid is in for a rude awakening. So is our "I think I'm chaotic good" rogue. Both of them have played selfish without regard to good and evil. They are both behaving quite chaotic neutral. While they will not suffer class-based penalties or consequences, this will cause some inter-party conflict as two players have been playing lawful neutral and another is lawful good!
Geethree 04-19-04, 07:52 PM	Alignment is also a very helpful descriptor for the DM. When I sit down and create an adventure, I need to know how likely a plot hook is going to work. First, I consider the characters, of course. What do they normally do? Does this appeal to them? Sometimes, this is not easy. Alignment allows me to see what a character should do, barring any extraordinary circumstances. A lawful good character is probably going to stop a petty crime being commited on the street. An evil player will be more likely to kill the various NPCs I am using in this adventure, if they become an obstacle. I find the alignment system to be helpful because it allows every single character (PC, NPC, or otherwise) to be described very briefly with two letters. Does any character ever act always according to their alignment? Of course not. Do most characters act according to their alignment the majority of the time? By definition, yes, they do. I can gauge a character's likely reaction to certain events and characters just by looking at their alignment.
Bacon and Eggs 04-20-04, 11:34 AM	I use the 8 virtues from the Ultima series. Then again everybody has preferences.
Sphyre 04-20-04, 04:33 PM	As with 95% of Edymnion's posts, i agree with what he said. Personally i ignore alignment all together until you need to determine it for purposes of a spell. I keep a track of how people act and such. If the player doesn't feel like their alignment has changed then I normally don't impose a new alignment - I let them keep track of it. As for monsters i tend to think of a backstory for why they are there. It doesn't have to be intricate but it's better than just "oh theres' a dragon on the road while you're traveling." He has to have some reason to be where he is. Many of the times it's a few steps away from the normal alignment of the monster. But it adds more flavor to the game than if you were to have a strict alignment system.
kasthevampire 04-20-04, 07:05 PM	i sugest a sort of meter measuring how good/bad you are like in knights of the old republic. bad deeds make it move toward evil and good deeds move you more toward the evil side. spells that affect alignments can do damage based on how evil/ good you are.
Xenocide 04-21-04, 01:46 AM	Create the character concept first then choose the appropriate alignment. Too many people while constructing their character choose an alignment then try to live some weird 'code'. On the good/evil access, just ask yourself are you going to consistently either help or exploit others. If neither, then you're neutral. For law/chaos, determine if your character lives by any code of conduct or if they despise 'legal restrictions'. If neither, again, they're neutral.
Xenocide 04-21-04, 01:46 AM	Create the character concept first then choose the appropriate alignment. Too many people while constructing their character choose an alignment then try to live some weird 'code'. On the good/evil access, just ask yourself are you going to consistently either help or exploit others. If neither, then you're neutral. For law/chaos, determine if your character lives by any code of conduct or if they despise 'legal restrictions'. If neither, again, they're neutral.
Ramses III 04-21-04, 09:15 AM	Per the Book of Vile Darkness and Book of Exalted Deeds, alignments are hard stats (like the numbered ones) in my campaigns. This does not mean, however, that i use them to restrict PC actions. Morality of deeds reflects on a character, and may change its alignment over time. This affects how characters and monsters are affected by spells and effects like detect evil or chaos hammer. I only warn a player if their character's action threatens to change their alignment or cause them loss of class features. I NEVER say, "you can't do that, you're Lawful Evil!" But i DO think alignment is a very useful tool and game mechanic, as it's a good way to predict, within a wide range of variations, how characters or monsters will act in given situations.