New Alignment Rule [Archive] - Wizards Community

New Alignment Rule [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
zzo38
05-20-07, 01:51 AM I wrote this 2 new alignment rules, you can make comment of it if you want. (The second one is based on Eberron but is designed to be used even with non-Eberon games)

Alignment
Here are 2 variants dealing with alignment. You can either use only one variant, or you can use both variants together.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

No Alignments
No creature actually has an alignment. You may still write an alignment on your character sheet, but it isn't your actual alignment. Your effective alignment (for purposes of magical items, detect alignment spells, etc) depends on your actions as well as other things. You may register as multiple alignments at the same time. Creatures with alignment subtypes always register as that alignment. Someone casting a spell with an alignment descriptor registers as that alignment. For example, if a creature with the good subtype casts an evil spell while commiting a lawful act, then that creature will register as good, evil, and lawful all at the same time.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Non-Fixed Dragon Alignments
In this variant, dragons alignments are not fixed depending on colors and chromatic/metallic. Any true dragon has an equal chance of being any alignment, and you cannot tell the dragon's alignment based on its appearance or special abilities.
RobbyPants
05-21-07, 11:16 AM I've toyed with something like this. The important thing to keep in mind is consistancy. It can be difficult to figure out what alignment a person registers as at any given moment. This type of a system opens the doors for all kinds of on-the-spot alignment/moral/ethical debates, so be ready!

The best advice I can give here is to spell out in advance what types of actions will yield various alignments. Even if the players don't agree, at least they know it in advance, and won't feel blind-sided. So if the DM tells the player that in his world, casting animate dead is an evil act, regardless of how it is used, then at least the player knows that before casting the spell, even if they feel otherwise.

As for the second variant, it's a flavor thing, really. I could easily see having good red dragons in your game. It would seem wierd at first, but it wouldn't really change anything.
zzo38
05-21-07, 01:16 PM .......So if the DM tells the player that in his world, casting animate dead is an evil act, regardless of how it is used, then at least the player knows that before casting the spell, even if they feel otherwise......

That spell has the Evil descriptor, which means that according to the rules that I wrote, it is already considered an evil act regardless of how it is used (the DM doesn't have to tell anybody if they know the rules), but maybe if you are doing it for good purposes then you can register as both good and evil simultaneously while casting that spell.

About the dragons, it wouldn't change much, but not knowing (or even guessing) the alignment of a dragon can make the game harder in some cases (depending on what you are trying to do).
RobbyPants
05-21-07, 03:32 PM That spell has the Evil descriptor, which means that according to the rules that I wrote, it is already considered an evil act regardless of how it is used (the DM doesn't have to tell anybody if they know the rules), but maybe if you are doing it for good purposes then you can register as both good and evil simultaneously while casting that spell.
That's exactly the type of point I was trying to make. I'm just warning you that not everyone sees eye-to-eye on moral issues, and alignment is no exception. The more up-front (and consistant) you can be with your rulings, the smoother the game will (hoplefully) go. ;)
VrecknidjX
05-27-07, 09:05 AM The issue of alignment and its effect on the game is, of course, the DM's responsibility. I have, in the past, run campaigns where I told my players to leave the Alignment portion of their character sheet blank. In those campaigns, I kept track of the characters' deeds and role playing and kept track of what their alignments turned out to be.

If someone wanted his character to be Good-aligned, then he had to convince me that his character was Good. If a player wanted his character to be Chaotic, he had to convince me that he was Chaotic.

This prevents people from doing whatever they want, and then, when having a particular alignment might save their skins, from pointing at something written on the sheet and saying "See, see, this is my alignment."

In those campaigns, my players had to earn their alignments.

Just FYI, I started everyone as neutral, unless they played a race that had a clear preference listed in the Monster Manual. So, since a dwarf is listed as "often lawful good," I'd assume that anyone playing a dwarf was going to be lawful good. But, if the first session proved otherwise, I'd switch back to assuming he was neutral.

Dave
RobbyPants
05-27-07, 10:16 AM The issue of alignment and its effect on the game is, of course, the DM's responsibility. I have, in the past, run campaigns where I told my players to leave the Alignment portion of their character sheet blank. In those campaigns, I kept track of the characters' deeds and role playing and kept track of what their alignments turned out to be.
<snip>
If you're willing to put the work into doing that (and the players are willing to trust your judgement ;)), this could be a nice solution.

About the only change I would implement, is allowing the players to choose their starting alignment (as opposed to starting as neutral, or their MM entry). They would still have to maintain that alignment through their actions, so the system would work the same, but there wouldn't need to be some rapid transition from neutral to their actual alignment. I think it would work nicer from a backstory prospective.
ragoftag
05-31-07, 01:27 PM After having a player flipping through his Rolodex(tm) of color-coded arrows when a dragon was spotted, I long ago discarded that relic. Precious few Dragons in my world are dumb/vain/arrogant.etc., to leave that big a whole in their defenses. Or did I miss the Dragon with a 6 Wis?

I try to keep an open dialog in-game on cultural norms, alignment and other things the player might be doing 'off'. Normally, a gentle nudge (Dwarves may hate goblins, but butchering the captives is not a Good thing.) is all that is needed. As much as I hate the current system, I have yet to find one that compensates for the initial transition costs, much less the maintenance costs. I like everyone I've seen, but...
AnonymouseRex
10-12-07, 07:23 PM Big fan of varient 2.

In Re: Varient 1
I have used similar "vauge" alignments in the past. The one really nice thing about it is that detect alignment or detect specific alignment spells get really interesting. The amount of information that passes through the GM is far greater. Instead of a brisk "LN" and on with the game you get to drop a brick on em and describe more. "He has a good heart but his hands seem stained with evil. The sword he carries at his side is a black splinter in the miasma of gray that surrounds him." Kinda thing. woot. Good Stuff.
Tequila_Sunrise
10-13-07, 01:19 AM ...I'm not seeing anything new here. Out of the maintstream, sure, but nothing really original or shocking.
poopmouth187
10-14-07, 09:41 PM In the campaign I am in right now the DM is useing the no alignment rule. I personaly don't aprove of it. We have a pally a cleric a druid and a bard a monk a rougue and a sorcerer. The pally started LG and now is evil and is still taking pally lvls. Also we dont play with deitys so the cleric doesnt have an alignment. So we have a lot of people who have alignment rules. I'm the sorcerer so it doesnt really affect me. It makes me angry that we dont have alignments because I'm used to playing with alignments. So i dont like the rule.
Erk_
10-22-07, 03:59 AM Letting the paladin break the code isn't an alignment issue, it is either a house rule or bad DMing. The Paladin's code is essentially alignment-independant: whether or not you have alignments for most characters, a paladin not behaving in a lawful good manner should Fall.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
zzo38 05-20-07, 01:51 AM	I wrote this 2 new alignment rules, you can make comment of it if you want. (The second one is based on Eberron but is designed to be used even with non-Eberon games) Alignment Here are 2 variants dealing with alignment. You can either use only one variant, or you can use both variants together. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- No Alignments No creature actually has an alignment. You may still write an alignment on your character sheet, but it isn't your actual alignment. Your effective alignment (for purposes of magical items, detect alignment spells, etc) depends on your actions as well as other things. You may register as multiple alignments at the same time. Creatures with alignment subtypes always register as that alignment. Someone casting a spell with an alignment descriptor registers as that alignment. For example, if a creature with the good subtype casts an evil spell while commiting a lawful act, then that creature will register as good, evil, and lawful all at the same time. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Non-Fixed Dragon Alignments In this variant, dragons alignments are not fixed depending on colors and chromatic/metallic. Any true dragon has an equal chance of being any alignment, and you cannot tell the dragon's alignment based on its appearance or special abilities.
RobbyPants 05-21-07, 11:16 AM	I've toyed with something like this. The important thing to keep in mind is consistancy. It can be difficult to figure out what alignment a person registers as at any given moment. This type of a system opens the doors for all kinds of on-the-spot alignment/moral/ethical debates, so be ready! The best advice I can give here is to spell out in advance what types of actions will yield various alignments. Even if the players don't agree, at least they know it in advance, and won't feel blind-sided. So if the DM tells the player that in his world, casting animate dead is an evil act, regardless of how it is used, then at least the player knows that before casting the spell, even if they feel otherwise. As for the second variant, it's a flavor thing, really. I could easily see having good red dragons in your game. It would seem wierd at first, but it wouldn't really change anything.
zzo38 05-21-07, 01:16 PM	.......So if the DM tells the player that in his world, casting animate dead is an evil act, regardless of how it is used, then at least the player knows that before casting the spell, even if they feel otherwise...... That spell has the Evil descriptor, which means that according to the rules that I wrote, it is already considered an evil act regardless of how it is used (the DM doesn't have to tell anybody if they know the rules), but maybe if you are doing it for good purposes then you can register as both good and evil simultaneously while casting that spell. About the dragons, it wouldn't change much, but not knowing (or even guessing) the alignment of a dragon can make the game harder in some cases (depending on what you are trying to do).
RobbyPants 05-21-07, 03:32 PM	That spell has the Evil descriptor, which means that according to the rules that I wrote, it is already considered an evil act regardless of how it is used (the DM doesn't have to tell anybody if they know the rules), but maybe if you are doing it for good purposes then you can register as both good and evil simultaneously while casting that spell. That's exactly the type of point I was trying to make. I'm just warning you that not everyone sees eye-to-eye on moral issues, and alignment is no exception. The more up-front (and consistant) you can be with your rulings, the smoother the game will (hoplefully) go. ;)
VrecknidjX 05-27-07, 09:05 AM	The issue of alignment and its effect on the game is, of course, the DM's responsibility. I have, in the past, run campaigns where I told my players to leave the Alignment portion of their character sheet blank. In those campaigns, I kept track of the characters' deeds and role playing and kept track of what their alignments turned out to be. If someone wanted his character to be Good-aligned, then he had to convince me that his character was Good. If a player wanted his character to be Chaotic, he had to convince me that he was Chaotic. This prevents people from doing whatever they want, and then, when having a particular alignment might save their skins, from pointing at something written on the sheet and saying "See, see, this is my alignment." In those campaigns, my players had to earn their alignments. Just FYI, I started everyone as neutral, unless they played a race that had a clear preference listed in the Monster Manual. So, since a dwarf is listed as "often lawful good," I'd assume that anyone playing a dwarf was going to be lawful good. But, if the first session proved otherwise, I'd switch back to assuming he was neutral. Dave
RobbyPants 05-27-07, 10:16 AM	The issue of alignment and its effect on the game is, of course, the DM's responsibility. I have, in the past, run campaigns where I told my players to leave the Alignment portion of their character sheet blank. In those campaigns, I kept track of the characters' deeds and role playing and kept track of what their alignments turned out to be. <snip> If you're willing to put the work into doing that (and the players are willing to trust your judgement ;)), this could be a nice solution. About the only change I would implement, is allowing the players to choose their starting alignment (as opposed to starting as neutral, or their MM entry). They would still have to maintain that alignment through their actions, so the system would work the same, but there wouldn't need to be some rapid transition from neutral to their actual alignment. I think it would work nicer from a backstory prospective.
ragoftag 05-31-07, 01:27 PM	After having a player flipping through his Rolodex(tm) of color-coded arrows when a dragon was spotted, I long ago discarded that relic. Precious few Dragons in my world are dumb/vain/arrogant.etc., to leave that big a whole in their defenses. Or did I miss the Dragon with a 6 Wis? I try to keep an open dialog in-game on cultural norms, alignment and other things the player might be doing 'off'. Normally, a gentle nudge (Dwarves may hate goblins, but butchering the captives is not a Good thing.) is all that is needed. As much as I hate the current system, I have yet to find one that compensates for the initial transition costs, much less the maintenance costs. I like everyone I've seen, but...
AnonymouseRex 10-12-07, 07:23 PM	Big fan of varient 2. In Re: Varient 1 I have used similar "vauge" alignments in the past. The one really nice thing about it is that detect alignment or detect specific alignment spells get really interesting. The amount of information that passes through the GM is far greater. Instead of a brisk "LN" and on with the game you get to drop a brick on em and describe more. "He has a good heart but his hands seem stained with evil. The sword he carries at his side is a black splinter in the miasma of gray that surrounds him." Kinda thing. woot. Good Stuff.
Tequila_Sunrise 10-13-07, 01:19 AM	...I'm not seeing anything new here. Out of the maintstream, sure, but nothing really original or shocking.
poopmouth187 10-14-07, 09:41 PM	In the campaign I am in right now the DM is useing the no alignment rule. I personaly don't aprove of it. We have a pally a cleric a druid and a bard a monk a rougue and a sorcerer. The pally started LG and now is evil and is still taking pally lvls. Also we dont play with deitys so the cleric doesnt have an alignment. So we have a lot of people who have alignment rules. I'm the sorcerer so it doesnt really affect me. It makes me angry that we dont have alignments because I'm used to playing with alignments. So i dont like the rule.
Erk_ 10-22-07, 03:59 AM	Letting the paladin break the code isn't an alignment issue, it is either a house rule or bad DMing. The Paladin's code is essentially alignment-independant: whether or not you have alignments for most characters, a paladin not behaving in a lawful good manner should Fall.