Sliding Alignment(15 position alignment card) [Archive] - Wizards Community

Sliding Alignment(15 position alignment card) [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
burpmaster12
07-10-06, 05:52 PM I made this card for a house rule in our games for sevrel reasons: So players have to realy think about their actions, so there isn't anyone playing as C/N that is realy C/E(or C/G for that matter), so that your basic player is not set in stone to what they are(IE a Evil player can join a good party, and do good to become a good player), And so Clerics/Paladins/ect Have to be very careful not to step out of there roles (to stay in favor with there gods).

I made it into a 15 dot sliding bar, 5 in each alignment.

You are considered To start out in the middle of the alignment you choose(but in some cases you might not be).

When ever you do a act of good, evil, law, or chaos, you move in that direction, if you do a neutral act you don't move.

DMs of campaigns that use this are encouraged to add many parts into there campaigns were the PCs have to make choices to be good or evil.(Example: in a dungeon a wounded man offers you a large sum of money to help him out of the dungeon and to the town, what do you do 1.take the man to town(good), 2.tell him your sorry but are too busy(neutral), 3.kill him and take his money(chaotic/evil), 4. ask him to double the money (Lawful/evil), ect)

It's completely up to the DM to what the action would be.

Also, add to all classes the skill "Common Sense", you can ask your DM what alignment a action is on a roll of 5, and ask him what would be good/evil/lawful/chaotic task on a roll of 10? DM can make this harder or easyer as he pleases(or not use this rule at all).

Also the DM might want to make some thing cost more then 1 point for extreme acts of good/evil/law/chaos.(Example: A Paladin Kill another fellow Paladin on request from the king of that land that he is ruled by, he does so, Gaining 1 dot torward lawful, but 3 dots torward evil)

Here's the card--- Alignment Card (http://www.maj.com/gallery/BM12/Random/slidingalignment.gif)

Feed back please! :D
Mysticaloctopus
07-10-06, 07:08 PM I feel this is a little too restrictive, myself. I've seen plenty of unusual alignment debates here, but I feel ruling too much about alignment can detract from the game a bit. For one thing, a PC rogue is often CN. This is the classic rogue alignment, and for a character like this I feel it represents being out for yourself, without a real streak of nastiness and perhaps with a slightly nice streak. He steals when he needs gold, for food or for a fancy sword he wants. He does this because it gets him what he wants. If he finds a traveller who offers gold for travel, he could rob them, kill them, help them and rob them, help them for free or help them for the money the offer. If they arrive alive, he'll be seen as a nice person and have a favour he's owed. This can be valuable - so he may have helped someone, the "right thing" for his own reasons. I don't think people's alignment should be constantly fluctuating - this is a sign either of an unsure player or unusual ruling by the DM. If a paladin has been raised from his pre-teen years to obey Royalty and the church of Pelor, he will do so. If the King or the Pope of Pelor issues a decree that Mr. Shiny Sword the famous paladin is evil, then a paladin going after Mr. Shiny Sword isn't doing evil, he's doing what he sees as LG. That's another thing to remember: Alignment is slightly subjective. Laws could make things legal, but keep them evil for the PCs, while Locals see these as neutral actions. Perhaps stoning your wife for adultery is legal in the small, backwards continent of Backwards. The PCs, and a paladin who doesn't recognise the legal code of Backwards as correct, see this as evil and thus accost an NPC who stones his wife - but then the PCs are evil in the eyes of the Backwards folk, and vice versa.

I don't pin down alignment with charts, but I do try to remind PCs to act as their character, not them, and if they really did make a bad choice I offer them a new character integration over a few sessions, maybe having the Paladin played by someone who isn't happy always playing LG entrusts the amulet of Smurf to his brother, the LN or NG fighter who never answered his call to Paladinhood.

Still, this is your game and if you want to run alignment as changing like the KotoR light side / dark side system, that's your decision in your game. As a whole, I'm not one for throwing in "make a choice, the outcome determines alignment for today" encounters, as I prefer to make it open-ended for the PCs to explore as befits their characters.
feartheinvinceblehamster
07-10-06, 09:50 PM I did away with alignment in my newest campaign setting. No actual game effect other than showing up for spells. I threw in a new alignment system where you get bonuses for being consistent in your actions.
Arcade
07-11-06, 01:27 PM The only comment that springs to mind is that a neutral act should not leave your score the same- it should move you toward the middle. If you're a goodie two shoes paladin and you tell the guy on the road you're too busy, you should be moved towards the neutral position of the good/evil track, not keep your good track the way it is. Also, if you're a good person and you do an evil deed, this should result in a greater jump towards the evil track. In another fashion, if you are 1 point away from the absolute pure goodness of the good/evil track and give a beggar a few coppers, you should not get pushed towards the far end. Good/evil/law/chaos are all relative so your actions and where you move on the chart should be relative to where you are now.
For instance, on good/evil from 1 to 15:
1- torture own mother for fun and profit
3- kill others mercilessly for money
7- Leave people alone, but if forced to choose, go with the ones who give you the most money
9- Leave people alone but if forced to choose, try to choose the good guys
12- Work towards helping others and bringing and stopping evil
15- Voluntarily give all worldly possessions to the poor and help famine, disease ridden societies for your entire life.

You can expand it of course, but as people do actions of the caliber listed, they should move towards that number and how far they move should depend on how far away they are from that numer they are.
burpmaster12
07-11-06, 11:42 PM The only comment that springs to mind is that a neutral act should not leave your score the same- it should move you toward the middle. If you're a goodie two shoes paladin and you tell the guy on the road you're too busy, you should be moved towards the neutral position of the good/evil track, not keep your good track the way it is. Also, if you're a good person and you do an evil deed, this should result in a greater jump towards the evil track. In another fashion, if you are 1 point away from the absolute pure goodness of the good/evil track and give a beggar a few coppers, you should not get pushed towards the far end. Good/evil/law/chaos are all relative so your actions and where you move on the chart should be relative to where you are now.
For instance, on good/evil from 1 to 15:
1- torture own mother for fun and profit
3- kill others mercilessly for money
7- Leave people alone, but if forced to choose, go with the ones who give you the most money
9- Leave people alone but if forced to choose, try to choose the good guys
12- Work towards helping others and bringing and stopping evil
15- Voluntarily give all worldly possessions to the poor and help famine, disease ridden societies for your entire life.

You can expand it of course, but as people do actions of the caliber listed, they should move towards that number and how far they move should depend on how far away they are from that numer they are.

I like both of those points!

Making a chart for general moral acts value sounds very promising. I get scratch paper and play around with the idea.

Thanks for the feed back! :)
varashiel
07-12-06, 11:50 AM Just curious, is it a line or a chart? I would be inclined to plot it out on a chart (say on graph paper) or so. that way, if you happen to be lawful good & preform a chaotic act you don't slide towards evil.

I tried this in one of my campaigns 4 years ago & it worked pretty well. Some of the players didn't like it because they had to be consistent with their character's stated world views (I make them do a short write up before starting.) However, it did act as a brake against the PC's getting out of hand.
Ryusage
07-12-06, 12:03 PM Ooh, i like! I think I might implement this in my campaign.
I recently had an argument with a player (CN dwarf fighter). When he reached a lvl, he wanted to multiclass knight. I pointed out that you must be of a lawful alignment to take the class.

Him: Ok, i change my alignment to LN.
Me: Huh? You're CN, buddy.
Him: Not anymore! From now on, ill be Lawful.
Me: Sorry, until you show me lawful behavior, your stuck at chaotic.

So for a while he's trying hard to get lawful

Me: OK, you've done a couple lawful things. Change you alignment to NN.
Him: No way! I was being lawful, not neutral!
Me: *sigh* yes but neutral is on the way to lawful.
Him :censored: You're a terrible DM! :censored: you!
Me: Out. Now.

So, now that he's gone, i might mail him one of these cards to show him how alignment works. Thanks!
burpmaster12
07-14-06, 11:36 PM I tested in out, it worked smashingly! Everyone had to think twice about there actions, and one C/N players is trying to be a litte nicer now that he's almost evil. :D

One thing I think I'll change, is I'll right down more "set in stone" levels of alignment(instead of just improving it), and add numbers to the levels( 5th level of evil = "-7" Middle neutral = "0" 5th level of good = "7", or maybe 1 threw 15.).

But I plan on using this for now on. DMs I've played under, and myself, have always used forms of aligment changeing do to actions, but it's always been too random. This adds atleast some order to the madness of alignment changeing. :P
frankthedm
07-19-06, 02:51 AM Cool! It looks like something i expect to see on a Vampire character sheet. I’d LOVE to se a “heiarchy of sins” for the D&D alignments.

Since most other things in 3e are mechanical, alignment should be as well. An idea I toyed around with was;

“Player Characters’ Alignments don’t change unless the player wants them to, but if their actions would have changed their alignment, They retain their alignment but are racked with guilt, indecisiveness and or disgust, suffering a 1- to -10 Morale penalty to attack rolls, saving throws, DCs and caster level until they atone or accept their new alignment.”

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
burpmaster12 07-10-06, 05:52 PM	I made this card for a house rule in our games for sevrel reasons: So players have to realy think about their actions, so there isn't anyone playing as C/N that is realy C/E(or C/G for that matter), so that your basic player is not set in stone to what they are(IE a Evil player can join a good party, and do good to become a good player), And so Clerics/Paladins/ect Have to be very careful not to step out of there roles (to stay in favor with there gods). I made it into a 15 dot sliding bar, 5 in each alignment. You are considered To start out in the middle of the alignment you choose(but in some cases you might not be). When ever you do a act of good, evil, law, or chaos, you move in that direction, if you do a neutral act you don't move. DMs of campaigns that use this are encouraged to add many parts into there campaigns were the PCs have to make choices to be good or evil.(Example: in a dungeon a wounded man offers you a large sum of money to help him out of the dungeon and to the town, what do you do 1.take the man to town(good), 2.tell him your sorry but are too busy(neutral), 3.kill him and take his money(chaotic/evil), 4. ask him to double the money (Lawful/evil), ect) It's completely up to the DM to what the action would be. Also, add to all classes the skill "Common Sense", you can ask your DM what alignment a action is on a roll of 5, and ask him what would be good/evil/lawful/chaotic task on a roll of 10? DM can make this harder or easyer as he pleases(or not use this rule at all). Also the DM might want to make some thing cost more then 1 point for extreme acts of good/evil/law/chaos.(Example: A Paladin Kill another fellow Paladin on request from the king of that land that he is ruled by, he does so, Gaining 1 dot torward lawful, but 3 dots torward evil) Here's the card--- Alignment Card (http://www.maj.com/gallery/BM12/Random/slidingalignment.gif) Feed back please! :D
Mysticaloctopus 07-10-06, 07:08 PM	I feel this is a little too restrictive, myself. I've seen plenty of unusual alignment debates here, but I feel ruling too much about alignment can detract from the game a bit. For one thing, a PC rogue is often CN. This is the classic rogue alignment, and for a character like this I feel it represents being out for yourself, without a real streak of nastiness and perhaps with a slightly nice streak. He steals when he needs gold, for food or for a fancy sword he wants. He does this because it gets him what he wants. If he finds a traveller who offers gold for travel, he could rob them, kill them, help them and rob them, help them for free or help them for the money the offer. If they arrive alive, he'll be seen as a nice person and have a favour he's owed. This can be valuable - so he may have helped someone, the "right thing" for his own reasons. I don't think people's alignment should be constantly fluctuating - this is a sign either of an unsure player or unusual ruling by the DM. If a paladin has been raised from his pre-teen years to obey Royalty and the church of Pelor, he will do so. If the King or the Pope of Pelor issues a decree that Mr. Shiny Sword the famous paladin is evil, then a paladin going after Mr. Shiny Sword isn't doing evil, he's doing what he sees as LG. That's another thing to remember: Alignment is slightly subjective. Laws could make things legal, but keep them evil for the PCs, while Locals see these as neutral actions. Perhaps stoning your wife for adultery is legal in the small, backwards continent of Backwards. The PCs, and a paladin who doesn't recognise the legal code of Backwards as correct, see this as evil and thus accost an NPC who stones his wife - but then the PCs are evil in the eyes of the Backwards folk, and vice versa. I don't pin down alignment with charts, but I do try to remind PCs to act as their character, not them, and if they really did make a bad choice I offer them a new character integration over a few sessions, maybe having the Paladin played by someone who isn't happy always playing LG entrusts the amulet of Smurf to his brother, the LN or NG fighter who never answered his call to Paladinhood. Still, this is your game and if you want to run alignment as changing like the KotoR light side / dark side system, that's your decision in your game. As a whole, I'm not one for throwing in "make a choice, the outcome determines alignment for today" encounters, as I prefer to make it open-ended for the PCs to explore as befits their characters.
feartheinvinceblehamster 07-10-06, 09:50 PM	I did away with alignment in my newest campaign setting. No actual game effect other than showing up for spells. I threw in a new alignment system where you get bonuses for being consistent in your actions.
Arcade 07-11-06, 01:27 PM	The only comment that springs to mind is that a neutral act should not leave your score the same- it should move you toward the middle. If you're a goodie two shoes paladin and you tell the guy on the road you're too busy, you should be moved towards the neutral position of the good/evil track, not keep your good track the way it is. Also, if you're a good person and you do an evil deed, this should result in a greater jump towards the evil track. In another fashion, if you are 1 point away from the absolute pure goodness of the good/evil track and give a beggar a few coppers, you should not get pushed towards the far end. Good/evil/law/chaos are all relative so your actions and where you move on the chart should be relative to where you are now. For instance, on good/evil from 1 to 15: 1- torture own mother for fun and profit 3- kill others mercilessly for money 7- Leave people alone, but if forced to choose, go with the ones who give you the most money 9- Leave people alone but if forced to choose, try to choose the good guys 12- Work towards helping others and bringing and stopping evil 15- Voluntarily give all worldly possessions to the poor and help famine, disease ridden societies for your entire life. You can expand it of course, but as people do actions of the caliber listed, they should move towards that number and how far they move should depend on how far away they are from that numer they are.
burpmaster12 07-11-06, 11:42 PM	The only comment that springs to mind is that a neutral act should not leave your score the same- it should move you toward the middle. If you're a goodie two shoes paladin and you tell the guy on the road you're too busy, you should be moved towards the neutral position of the good/evil track, not keep your good track the way it is. Also, if you're a good person and you do an evil deed, this should result in a greater jump towards the evil track. In another fashion, if you are 1 point away from the absolute pure goodness of the good/evil track and give a beggar a few coppers, you should not get pushed towards the far end. Good/evil/law/chaos are all relative so your actions and where you move on the chart should be relative to where you are now. For instance, on good/evil from 1 to 15: 1- torture own mother for fun and profit 3- kill others mercilessly for money 7- Leave people alone, but if forced to choose, go with the ones who give you the most money 9- Leave people alone but if forced to choose, try to choose the good guys 12- Work towards helping others and bringing and stopping evil 15- Voluntarily give all worldly possessions to the poor and help famine, disease ridden societies for your entire life. You can expand it of course, but as people do actions of the caliber listed, they should move towards that number and how far they move should depend on how far away they are from that numer they are. I like both of those points! Making a chart for general moral acts value sounds very promising. I get scratch paper and play around with the idea. Thanks for the feed back! :)
varashiel 07-12-06, 11:50 AM	Just curious, is it a line or a chart? I would be inclined to plot it out on a chart (say on graph paper) or so. that way, if you happen to be lawful good & preform a chaotic act you don't slide towards evil. I tried this in one of my campaigns 4 years ago & it worked pretty well. Some of the players didn't like it because they had to be consistent with their character's stated world views (I make them do a short write up before starting.) However, it did act as a brake against the PC's getting out of hand.
Ryusage 07-12-06, 12:03 PM	Ooh, i like! I think I might implement this in my campaign. I recently had an argument with a player (CN dwarf fighter). When he reached a lvl, he wanted to multiclass knight. I pointed out that you must be of a lawful alignment to take the class. Him: Ok, i change my alignment to LN. Me: Huh? You're CN, buddy. Him: Not anymore! From now on, ill be Lawful. Me: Sorry, until you show me lawful behavior, your stuck at chaotic. So for a while he's trying hard to get lawful Me: OK, you've done a couple lawful things. Change you alignment to NN. Him: No way! I was being lawful, not neutral! Me: sigh yes but neutral is on the way to lawful. Him :censored: You're a terrible DM! :censored: you! Me: Out. Now. So, now that he's gone, i might mail him one of these cards to show him how alignment works. Thanks!
burpmaster12 07-14-06, 11:36 PM	I tested in out, it worked smashingly! Everyone had to think twice about there actions, and one C/N players is trying to be a litte nicer now that he's almost evil. :D One thing I think I'll change, is I'll right down more "set in stone" levels of alignment(instead of just improving it), and add numbers to the levels( 5th level of evil = "-7" Middle neutral = "0" 5th level of good = "7", or maybe 1 threw 15.). But I plan on using this for now on. DMs I've played under, and myself, have always used forms of aligment changeing do to actions, but it's always been too random. This adds atleast some order to the madness of alignment changeing. :P
frankthedm 07-19-06, 02:51 AM	Cool! It looks like something i expect to see on a Vampire character sheet. I’d LOVE to se a “heiarchy of sins” for the D&D alignments. Since most other things in 3e are mechanical, alignment should be as well. An idea I toyed around with was; “Player Characters’ Alignments don’t change unless the player wants them to, but if their actions would have changed their alignment, They retain their alignment but are racked with guilt, indecisiveness and or disgust, suffering a 1- to -10 Morale penalty to attack rolls, saving throws, DCs and caster level until they atone or accept their new alignment.”