A Book on Alignment [Archive] - Wizards Community

A Book on Alignment [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Brave Sir Robin
06-10-05, 10:13 PM It might just be me but I seem to read alot on these threads about alignments, should I do this, or should I do that, and having run into alignment problems in my own games it seems that a book on alignments would be in order.

I know, I know most of you would say there are lots of books that talk about alignment BoED, BoVD, and the PH to name a few. But the afore mentioned books give alot of black and white. What about the gray area that most PCs seem to get (or get someone else) into.

You could say "in the end its up to the DM",but this just frustrates players who feel that their actions could have been viewed otherwize.Im not talking about a book that re-states what we alredy have Im talking about a book that gives exampls of the various situations.

DM: As you walk along the road you see a orc who is badly wonded.
Paladin: I walk up and finish him off because orcs are EEEEEvil. :fight!:

Most of the paladins in my (and it seems like most peoples)games would do something of this nature, or just leave the orc there to die.

This to me is not a good act.BUT it is a gray area. True most orcs are evil, :devil: but this kind of treatment to a hurt orc, is by its vary nature evil.
I just think it would be nice to have this kind of book for DM and players.
alike. Well just wated to see what everyone else thinks :D
Fixxxer
06-10-05, 10:26 PM The problem with trying to publish a book about alignment is that alignment can be looked at in completely different ways by people with completely different moral perspectives. Trying to say that only one perspective about alignment is the "right" perspective is a sort of corporate suicide for a company like WotC, which already has a bad stigma attached to it due to producing the D&D game in the first place.
enailis
06-10-05, 10:33 PM The problem with trying to publish a book about alignment is that alignment can be looked at in completely different ways by people with completely different moral perspectives. Trying to say that only one perspective about alignment is the "right" perspective is a sort of corporate suicide for a company like WotC, which already has a bad stigma attached to it due to producing the D&D game in the first place.
ah, yes the Jack Chick crowd... I almost forgot about them....
I personally think BoED, and BoVD would have been more adecpted if they hadn't
put in all thoose crazy feats and stuff....(I think the vows are feats, I don't actually own the game I’m just basing this of what I've heard)
Brave Sir Robin
06-10-05, 10:40 PM Im not saying a set in stone per-se Im just saying a book that outlines the gray areas and gives DMs some well thought out, tested methods for alignment prbloms.
enailis
06-10-05, 10:52 PM That’s reasonable…. On the other hand there those think any thing written is written in stone, and then there’s the crazy people, and there are a lot of them…. :D
TheErsatzFacsimileOfMe
06-10-05, 10:55 PM The problem with that is that there are no real tried and true methods of determining alignment. The subject matter is not subjective and could be skewed in any direction the reader likes. Thus all the problems with alignment in the first place.

My biggest bit of help for anyone DM or player:
Sit down and talk about what the nine alignments mean to all of you and come to some form of agreement on it. That's what I do, it works well because everyone can recall the conversation and their own input to it.
Brave Sir Robin
06-10-05, 11:03 PM The problem with that is that there are no real tried and true methods of determining alignment.

If there are no true methods of determining alignment then why do we have them in the first place? :confused:

I mean I know that even good people make bad choieses, and the ocational slip of alignment should not be punished but having a book that explains in detail the characteristics of the big nine would help.
Fixxxer
06-10-05, 11:35 PM If there are no true methods of determining alignment then why do we have them in the first place? :confused:

There is no true method of creating energy or matter from nothingness, but we have both energy and matter.

Alignment is a concept based completely on the moral system of the individual gaming group. Everybody sees alignment in their own way, and this way usually doesn't match up well with the next guy's way.

For example, you spoke earlier about a paladin encountering a wounded orc on the side of the road and either killing it or leaving it to die because orcs are evil. You mention this a non-good "gray area" and I get the feeling that this wouldn't cause a paladin in your game to lose his abilities.

I, on the other hand, see this as an act completely opposite everything a paladin stands for and in my game, a apaldin would certainly lose his abilities for arbitrarily killing (or worse, leaving to die) an orc on the side of the road simply because "all orcs are evil." As I see it, a paladin is responsible for showing this orc the true path to goodness... coverting, rather than killing.

You probably think I'm wrong, and that's ok. This is just an example about how different people see different issues in different ways. Publishing a book that says "This is a list of evil acts. This is a list of good acts." is robably a bad idea, since there is bound to be a large percentage of potential readers who will completely disagree with half the material in the book. This is called "alienating your fanbase" and it's a really bad idea.
mycroft65536
06-11-05, 12:14 AM I am in favor of such a book, on the first page as i right this is a thread about someone playing a paladin who killed a baby in order to avoid being discovered by ogres. He doesn't think that he should be striped of his powers. It's sad but somewhere it needs to be written that killing babys is an evil act.
Guy Humual
06-11-05, 12:48 AM Do we really need alignments? I often wonder if D&D would be any simpler if we simply got rid of them altogether. I think that would be a better investment of time and energy then trying to further define such broad terms as good, evil, law, and chaos.

Actually, now that I think about it, this too may cause more problems then it's worth. Please disregard this post. :)
Brave Sir Robin
06-11-05, 01:08 AM I, on the other hand, see this as an act completely opposite everything a paladin stands for and in my game, a apaldin would certainly lose his abilities for arbitrarily killing (or worse, leaving to die) an orc on the side of the road simply because "all orcs are evil." As I see it, a paladin is responsible for showing this orc the true path to goodness... coverting, rather than killing.

You probably think I'm wrong, and that's ok.

I agre completly, a paladin should try to show him the way of goodness but the sad fact is that in many of the games I play in (and from reading the bords many that others play in)paladin is simply a licence to kill anything with the evil descriptor or alignment. you probly have a point about alienating the fanbase I was just looking for some way (in light of some recent problems with alignment) to fix it, perhaps a book that covers more of a genaral look on alignments like short storys about characters with difrent alignments. :lightbulb
Rathje
06-11-05, 01:26 AM In my gaming group, I've (as the primary DM) defined alignment as "Cause and Effect." The first part (Law, Neutral, Chaos) is the action, while the second part (Good, Neutral, Evil) is the reason behind it. Stealing from the rich to give to the poor? Stealing is bad (Chaotic), but it's to help out needy folks (Good). Enroll as a knight in the army because your parents say so? Well, serving the kingdom could be seen as just (Lawful), but it's kind of a "just because" reason (Neutral).

However, note the "Could be seen as" in that last sentence. This still isn't a catch-all. It's just a guide-line. That's also how my gaming group sees alignment: a guide-line. We've done away with alignment restrictions for classes (if the character can justify it), as long as the character doesn't multi-class to things that can't normally (Such as Paladin/Assassin). The latter part was done to prevent something like a Barbarian/Dwarven Defender with stacking Damage Reduction. We weren't sure how balanced that was.

Just talk to your group and work out some guide-lines for alignment. Also make it clear that not everything has a clearly defined alignment, and it varies from person to person. Alignment's abstract.
Deflare
06-11-05, 03:04 AM A book on alignment may actually work, if done right. Besides alignment-specific classes, spells, and feats, it could have short stories about each alignment, with 2 or 3 authors per alignment. This would help show the differences and similarities in opinion in regard to alignments.

I never pay much attention to alignments. More accurately, I tend to go against them completely. For example, in my campaign world, the leader of the Orcish Empire is a LG ex-Barbarian/Paladin. The emperor of the Halfling empire is LN or LE (forgot which), and is only seen by the public once a year for an annual ceremony in the capital. I only use them for RP purposes; I'm even thinking of lifting alignment restrictions on classes. While certain things can clearly be labeled good, evil, lawful, or chaotic, there's simply too much gray for the black-and-white system of DnD.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Brave Sir Robin 06-10-05, 10:13 PM	It might just be me but I seem to read alot on these threads about alignments, should I do this, or should I do that, and having run into alignment problems in my own games it seems that a book on alignments would be in order. I know, I know most of you would say there are lots of books that talk about alignment BoED, BoVD, and the PH to name a few. But the afore mentioned books give alot of black and white. What about the gray area that most PCs seem to get (or get someone else) into. You could say "in the end its up to the DM",but this just frustrates players who feel that their actions could have been viewed otherwize.Im not talking about a book that re-states what we alredy have Im talking about a book that gives exampls of the various situations. DM: As you walk along the road you see a orc who is badly wonded. Paladin: I walk up and finish him off because orcs are EEEEEvil. :fight!: Most of the paladins in my (and it seems like most peoples)games would do something of this nature, or just leave the orc there to die. This to me is not a good act.BUT it is a gray area. True most orcs are evil, :devil: but this kind of treatment to a hurt orc, is by its vary nature evil. I just think it would be nice to have this kind of book for DM and players. alike. Well just wated to see what everyone else thinks :D
Fixxxer 06-10-05, 10:26 PM	The problem with trying to publish a book about alignment is that alignment can be looked at in completely different ways by people with completely different moral perspectives. Trying to say that only one perspective about alignment is the "right" perspective is a sort of corporate suicide for a company like WotC, which already has a bad stigma attached to it due to producing the D&D game in the first place.
enailis 06-10-05, 10:33 PM	The problem with trying to publish a book about alignment is that alignment can be looked at in completely different ways by people with completely different moral perspectives. Trying to say that only one perspective about alignment is the "right" perspective is a sort of corporate suicide for a company like WotC, which already has a bad stigma attached to it due to producing the D&D game in the first place. ah, yes the Jack Chick crowd... I almost forgot about them.... I personally think BoED, and BoVD would have been more adecpted if they hadn't put in all thoose crazy feats and stuff....(I think the vows are feats, I don't actually own the game I’m just basing this of what I've heard)
Brave Sir Robin 06-10-05, 10:40 PM	Im not saying a set in stone per-se Im just saying a book that outlines the gray areas and gives DMs some well thought out, tested methods for alignment prbloms.
enailis 06-10-05, 10:52 PM	That’s reasonable…. On the other hand there those think any thing written is written in stone, and then there’s the crazy people, and there are a lot of them…. :D
TheErsatzFacsimileOfMe 06-10-05, 10:55 PM	The problem with that is that there are no real tried and true methods of determining alignment. The subject matter is not subjective and could be skewed in any direction the reader likes. Thus all the problems with alignment in the first place. My biggest bit of help for anyone DM or player: Sit down and talk about what the nine alignments mean to all of you and come to some form of agreement on it. That's what I do, it works well because everyone can recall the conversation and their own input to it.
Brave Sir Robin 06-10-05, 11:03 PM	The problem with that is that there are no real tried and true methods of determining alignment. If there are no true methods of determining alignment then why do we have them in the first place? :confused: I mean I know that even good people make bad choieses, and the ocational slip of alignment should not be punished but having a book that explains in detail the characteristics of the big nine would help.
Fixxxer 06-10-05, 11:35 PM	If there are no true methods of determining alignment then why do we have them in the first place? :confused: There is no true method of creating energy or matter from nothingness, but we have both energy and matter. Alignment is a concept based completely on the moral system of the individual gaming group. Everybody sees alignment in their own way, and this way usually doesn't match up well with the next guy's way. For example, you spoke earlier about a paladin encountering a wounded orc on the side of the road and either killing it or leaving it to die because orcs are evil. You mention this a non-good "gray area" and I get the feeling that this wouldn't cause a paladin in your game to lose his abilities. I, on the other hand, see this as an act completely opposite everything a paladin stands for and in my game, a apaldin would certainly lose his abilities for arbitrarily killing (or worse, leaving to die) an orc on the side of the road simply because "all orcs are evil." As I see it, a paladin is responsible for showing this orc the true path to goodness... coverting, rather than killing. You probably think I'm wrong, and that's ok. This is just an example about how different people see different issues in different ways. Publishing a book that says "This is a list of evil acts. This is a list of good acts." is robably a bad idea, since there is bound to be a large percentage of potential readers who will completely disagree with half the material in the book. This is called "alienating your fanbase" and it's a really bad idea.
mycroft65536 06-11-05, 12:14 AM	I am in favor of such a book, on the first page as i right this is a thread about someone playing a paladin who killed a baby in order to avoid being discovered by ogres. He doesn't think that he should be striped of his powers. It's sad but somewhere it needs to be written that killing babys is an evil act.
Guy Humual 06-11-05, 12:48 AM	Do we really need alignments? I often wonder if D&D would be any simpler if we simply got rid of them altogether. I think that would be a better investment of time and energy then trying to further define such broad terms as good, evil, law, and chaos. Actually, now that I think about it, this too may cause more problems then it's worth. Please disregard this post. :)
Brave Sir Robin 06-11-05, 01:08 AM	I, on the other hand, see this as an act completely opposite everything a paladin stands for and in my game, a apaldin would certainly lose his abilities for arbitrarily killing (or worse, leaving to die) an orc on the side of the road simply because "all orcs are evil." As I see it, a paladin is responsible for showing this orc the true path to goodness... coverting, rather than killing. You probably think I'm wrong, and that's ok. I agre completly, a paladin should try to show him the way of goodness but the sad fact is that in many of the games I play in (and from reading the bords many that others play in)paladin is simply a licence to kill anything with the evil descriptor or alignment. you probly have a point about alienating the fanbase I was just looking for some way (in light of some recent problems with alignment) to fix it, perhaps a book that covers more of a genaral look on alignments like short storys about characters with difrent alignments. :lightbulb
Rathje 06-11-05, 01:26 AM	In my gaming group, I've (as the primary DM) defined alignment as "Cause and Effect." The first part (Law, Neutral, Chaos) is the action, while the second part (Good, Neutral, Evil) is the reason behind it. Stealing from the rich to give to the poor? Stealing is bad (Chaotic), but it's to help out needy folks (Good). Enroll as a knight in the army because your parents say so? Well, serving the kingdom could be seen as just (Lawful), but it's kind of a "just because" reason (Neutral). However, note the "Could be seen as" in that last sentence. This still isn't a catch-all. It's just a guide-line. That's also how my gaming group sees alignment: a guide-line. We've done away with alignment restrictions for classes (if the character can justify it), as long as the character doesn't multi-class to things that can't normally (Such as Paladin/Assassin). The latter part was done to prevent something like a Barbarian/Dwarven Defender with stacking Damage Reduction. We weren't sure how balanced that was. Just talk to your group and work out some guide-lines for alignment. Also make it clear that not everything has a clearly defined alignment, and it varies from person to person. Alignment's abstract.
Deflare 06-11-05, 03:04 AM	A book on alignment may actually work, if done right. Besides alignment-specific classes, spells, and feats, it could have short stories about each alignment, with 2 or 3 authors per alignment. This would help show the differences and similarities in opinion in regard to alignments. I never pay much attention to alignments. More accurately, I tend to go against them completely. For example, in my campaign world, the leader of the Orcish Empire is a LG ex-Barbarian/Paladin. The emperor of the Halfling empire is LN or LE (forgot which), and is only seen by the public once a year for an annual ceremony in the capital. I only use them for RP purposes; I'm even thinking of lifting alignment restrictions on classes. While certain things can clearly be labeled good, evil, lawful, or chaotic, there's simply too much gray for the black-and-white system of DnD.