Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Calawyn 01-13-04, 09:47 PM	Yet again, I'm having a bit of trouble with the alignment system. Especially since it's too cut and dry for my campaign setting. Soooooo... I was wondering if anyone had any alternative systems for alignment? What I'm thinking about possibly implementing is an an honour points system, where 0 would mean you were entirely neutral, grounds very difficult to keep, and +1 would mean you're a pretty good guy, obeys most major laws (killing, etc...) -1 would mean you're still a pretty good person but aren't concerned very much with the constraints of the law. And progressively in each direction would get more devoted to that particular path. I'm not trying to railroad my players into adhering to something uncharactaristic or trying to punish characters who are evil. It's really just to classify them for the onlooker or just for my own purposes, and it'd be entirely liquid, the system that is. So if you were at -5 alignment points (or whatever I end up calling them) but saved an old lady from drowning and being eaten by sharks, at the risk of your own life, you'd probably end up being somewhere closer to +3 or -1 afterwards. Just a thought, any other ideas? *desperate*
Northen_Spur 01-13-04, 10:36 PM	Well this was discused in an othe thread -Alighment remouval project (I can't seem to be able to find it) The Major problem with Alighment isn't that they exist is that players aways seem to break from them. So Alighments are mostly a "how my Pc he acts in general" guide, I tend too be Alighment severe on my Player. Your Idea is good, I would maybe add on a larger scale of -100 to 100, -100 being monumental evil and 100 the ultimate representation of good. I would add: A more precise system would be like the Video game Darklands where you had a city to city rating and a national rating. Player could act as they chose, with Local autority deciding the Lawful, neutral, Chaotic aspect of the Pc. And the average would serve to indicate the Nation average. So a Pc in the town of Skald could be seen as Lawfull (obeing the town's Law) with a +100 (moderatly good) and be criminals in an other city of Clank Be seen a Chaotic (breaking the laws) with a - 50 (petty evil) and in the un-Visited city of Waterdeep Be seen as Neutral 0 -Unknowed with a toril average of Neutral +50 (minor good) Only problem is the poor Dm that has to calculate oall these points. An alternative would be à la Shadowrun Where players do what they please and it's the people around them that juges their actions. So the Fickle crows could love an evil guy who throws money around while they hate a pitious monk who they see as a drain on the economy. only problem, No evil indicators (so a good guy could weild an evil sword guy cause he feels like it), no detecting alighment (could be replaced with detect harmull intent) etc...
Mitchell 01-14-04, 03:59 AM	Let me get this out of the way... The existing alignment system is fluid. Okay, there is, in the DC heroes system, a motivation instead of alignment. This included things like uphold the good, responsibility of power, etc. These cover a wide range, not just "good". Not on the path you're on now, but something you may want to check (or not). The biggest issues with what you have now are 1) Fitting the existing alignment type things into the new system 2) How fluid do you want it to be. If a player can go on a homicidal rage, then just save one innocents life and be back on "the side of the angels", that seems a bit too fluid. If you want, just keep a scorecard for everyone. Every evil act is -1, every good act is +1, and neutrality doesn't matter. Particularly heinous or selfless acts could score more. A 100 point scale would work in this case, as you could store "karma", or have to do some serious payback to get back to the good side. Edit: I initially thought that the motivation system was in palladium, but then I wasn't so sure what they used, if anything.
Glock-9mm 01-14-04, 07:11 AM	If your looking for a replacement system or idea, Take a look at Vampire the Masqurades equiv of Alignment. Its based on "Nature" and Demenour", It may be what your looking for, If not... Then so be it. :)
Shurdus 01-14-04, 08:08 AM	The problem I see using you liquid system is that it in no way represent your character the way he is. Consider this. You will give a random character an alignment of 0. This meant *either* that he does not get involved enough to award him points in any direction, *or* it could mean that some good character also has done some things that were considered evel enough to cancel out his good deeds. Maybe he did his evil deeds by accident, just because he hadn't taken enough time to consider his actions, and they turnded out bad. My point is, the guy motivated to do good thing would be an entirely different person, yet his points would be the same. Also, your fluid system does not pinpoint the character. It is an arbitrary system that is in no way defined and therefore it would be useless. It is in no way a guideline for what your character believes in, since you award points for every action the character undertakes. So what does a -1 on the honour scale represent? Everybody does some things that could be considered evil from time to time. But so what if I do evil things? I would have to perform one good action and I'm in the clear again. As long as your alignment shifts by EVERY action you undertake it is a useless system for a lack of a proper standard. Your alignment does not represent your character, it is merely the result of summing up the actions he has unertaken. But is he motivated to do good things? Evil things? Those are major traits that are not represented by your system. And as long as you cannot pinpoint any kind of an alignment my character could do pretty much anything he likes. How would you know it is *against his nature* to slay children? Says who? If I could get a lot of money from it... So what if that is purely evil? Considering my major good deeds in the past it will still leave me with an alignment of +5 on the honour scale... See my point? Shurdus
wdarkk 01-14-04, 08:41 AM	Why not use the d20Modern Alegience system? Then have Protection/Detection/Magic Circle Against Alegience spells.
Millennium 01-14-04, 10:50 AM	The system you're talking about sounds a lot like something suggested as an alternative system for Rokugan. Check out the Oriental Adventures handbook for more information on that one.
Bacon and Eggs 01-14-04, 10:53 AM	My favourite alternative system is the one that originated in the Ultima 4 PC game. Eight Virtues of Honesty, Compassion, Valor, Justice, Sacrifice, Honor, Spirituality, and Humility. More recordkeeping, but it does the trick for me when playing in games where alignment is not so cut and dry.
WhtKnt 01-14-04, 11:06 AM	Originally posted by wdarkk Why not use the d20Modern Alegience system? Then have Protection/Detection/Magic Circle Against Alegience spells. Exactly what I've done in my own campaign. Alignments have disappeared, replaced by allegiances. Much more flexible and more believable. As for the spells, I just modified them so that they defend against a creature of the appropriate allegiance (evil, law, good, or chaos).
hexgrid 01-14-04, 11:07 AM	Have you considered leaving alignment out all together? Aside from the game mechanic problems the causes (which can be fairly easily resolved, see the Alignment Removal thread) you seriously won't miss it at all. I recently made this leap in my campaign. It's very liberating... Note- this isn't to say that alignment is bad for everyone, but for many people it causes more headaches than it enhances the game. And if it doesn't work for you and/or your players, why bother with it?
quetzyl 01-14-04, 11:51 AM	I use a half way system. Alignment does exist, but it is only relevant to clerics, outsiders and people and objects with direct connections to aligned outer-planear forces. For example, a low level cleric of an evil god has a detectable evil alignment, while a murderous thief will not be detectably evil. For PC's, most characters are entitled to behave in any way they want, while clerics, paladins etc are forced to behave according to the ethos that they follow. Monks have to come up with a specific code of conduct that they must obey, while barbarians have no restrictions (because I think that forcing a class which requires chaotic behavior to follow a code of conduct defeats the point). However, I also have demonic and angelic powers which take an interest in mortal affairs, so if players behave in an evil way they may find themselves being offered pacts with evil, or even wind up with guardian demons whose presence they are unaware of. Cheers, quetzyl
StormKnight 01-14-04, 12:35 PM	I have mentioned this elsewhere, but my houserules are that alignment represents your characters magical and karmic ties to certain powers. You (in this world) have these whether you want them or know about them. Alignment is not the same as personality, but it does shape it. An "evil" alignment person will benefit from evil acts and have poor results of good acts, and so learn to lean toward evil. Or will remain steadfast in being good, and eventually be abandoned by evil powers and adopted by good powers (alignment change to good). This way, characters can have a unique personality within their alignment without messing up all the alignment based spells. In my game, I give out Good Karma and Bad Karma dice, but these could just as easily be experience awards and penalties. You get good karma for things in line with your alignment, bad karma for things against their alignment. But, these awards have NOTHING to do with the character's personality and shouldn't be confused with a good roleplaying award. A character that gets five or more bad karma dice can choose to change an aspect of their alignment, at the cost of doubling their bad karma dice. However, the GM can refuse to allow them to change, or can forcibly change it at this point as well. Sometimes the powers that be are strangely reluctant to let go of someone. This also allows you to have NPCs with complex motivations without too much head pain over what alignment they should be, and to make the occasional (though it should not be common) character who detects as something very different from what their personality is.
Calawyn 01-14-04, 02:31 PM	I have thought about excluding it entirely, but right now we're playtesting our Elder Scrolls d20 campaign, and I'm not sure if any of you are familiar with it, but I'm trying to make it fit best to that world. And it's proving to be one of the more difficult parts.
NorthSaber 01-14-04, 06:05 PM	Just a quick thought: in my next campaign with DnD, I'm probably going to keep the default alignment system as guidelines for character development, but I will substitute "selfless" for "good" and "selfish" for "evil". There will be no spells or effects related to alignments - I don't believe in good or evil, and chaotic and lawful are iffy.
Illithidbix 01-14-04, 10:45 PM	Cutting out Alignment is also something I'm working on. I find the Alignment descriptors in the PHB to be totally odd and doesn't fit any person I actually know in real life (or really in fiction either). I certainly cannot see what Alignment I would fit into, it would be useless if anyone tried to role-play me, so why should it be useful for me to role-play someone else? The question I would ask is what exactly do you want the Alignment system for? Why are you keeping track of it? To help with character creation? I would just drop it totally, it just results in stereotypical "what would my alignment do..." thinking, rather encouraging real think about things from the characters perspective and personality, I fail to see how it helps role-playing at all, it seems to be a bit of a cop out to get quick answers to moral dilemmas. And to me a PC’s actions should never be dictated to by their Alignment. For a more cosmic system, dealing with Gods, Planes and Outsiders, I would perhaps have it only apply between opposition forces, and perhaps make the oppositions a bit more rigidly defined than just “Good vs Evil”. For Spell effects, I would replace religious types with “detect infidel” type spells (rather than “detect evil”), which detect followers, clerics and Outsiders that oppose your God/Ideals. Here I would perhaps also restrict it to the archenermies of your God. Maybe a form of “Detect Malicious intent” for Wizards and Bards. The same principle could apply to “Protection from…” type spells as well.
Wayward Son 01-15-04, 10:04 AM	On the point of removing alignment, Monte Cook did it quite well in Arcana Unearthed (from Malhavoc Press). You might want to check it out. As for alternate system, I say that if you're going to keep an alignment system, the one in 3.5 works well as a guideline. You just have to expand your worldview to include the definate existance of two sets of universal forces in diametric opposition, attempting to influence the Material Plane and gain dominance as so overcome their opposite. What that means for the people in the MP is that their actions, consciously directed or not, have a ripple effect in that balance. Most of the ripples are very small, but if a lot of people all take similar actions, the effect increases. Most won't see it in anything other than a shift in the "tone" or "mood" of the world around them, if even that. Those with strong ties of devotion to extraplanar forces will see the changes more clearly, and act according to their own view of how it "should be". When it comes to PCs, for most the alignment will just be a descriptor of how they tend to act, nothing more. Some few will be required to behave in a particular manner, but that shouldn't be a problem to a player who is actually role-playing his character. Yes, a monk should be played as disciplined. That doesn't prevent the monk from being inventive, original, outgoing, or anything else; it just reflects the years of training that have made his fighting style as natural as breathing to him. If the player wants to play a monk who kills random people on a whim, he's chosen the wrong class. So, if you remove it, it's not a big deal, but it works fine as long as you remember that the descriptions given are guidelines of the ideal member of that alignment. Few people will meet the ideal.