The basis of the harmony/discord system is this: when your character is acting in line with his personality, he performs slightly better in nearly all respects. Someone who is fighting for what they believe in fights harder than the conscript soldier pressed into service against their will. Someone who is acting in defense of a person whom they deeply love will feel more conviction that someone who is fighting for reasons they do not understand.
Allow me to introduce the first of two mechanics that govern this system:
A personality is like a mosaic of tiles that represents the inner-most self. Each tile is a memory, a philosophy, an emotion, or a belief. Some of the tiles fade over the years, some grow brighter. Sometimes a tile is added, sometimes they are removed. For some people, the mosaic is a beautiful tapestry of shapes and color, fitting together in harmony. However, some people are missing tiles they should have, sometimes their tiles are shattered or broken, or rotted to the core.
Each person's mosaic is unique, and it has real effects on their lives.
In game terms, your character can have a small number of defining "personality aspects" that in this metaphor are particularly central, bright, or large tiles. At character creation, you may select a number of aspects equal the highest modifier you have in wisdom, intelligence, and charisma. Every character must have at least one personality aspect.
When you are acting in accordance with a personality aspect, you are said to be in “harmony” with that aspect. If you are instead acting at counter purposes to this belief, you are in “discord”. There are several distinct types of personality aspects, and the circumstances for harmony or discord are described in each entry below
[INDENT]Belief:this aspect encompasses sacred oaths, personal philosophies, or any sort of mantra that can be easily summarized. Beliefs vary greatly in complexity and extent; they may as simple as a belief in the sanctity of life, or as complex as a knight’s oath of fealty or chivalry.
You are in harmony with a belief whenever you are working directly towards upholding the tenets of that belief. You are in discord whenever you are violating that belief.
Love: love is amazingly complex, and almost impossible to describe in full, but within the realm of this system, it is considered to be an extraordinarily strong emotional bond to a person or thing. Love can apply to a single person, or to an object (such as a costly musical instrument, or a family heirloom). The feelings need not be mutual.
You are in harmony whenever you are working in the best interests of the object of your love, or working to protect it. If the object of your love is a physical object, you are in harmony whenever you are wielding or carrying it. You are in discord whenever you are working against the best interest of, or against the direct demands of your love.
If you are separated from your love for more than a week, you are neither in harmony nor discord. If the separation was involuntary and violent, you are in discord until you see him/her/it again.
If a person you love dies, you may choose to lose or retain this personality aspect (I.e. “it’s what she would have wanted”), if an object you love is destroyed, you lose this aspect.
Loyalty: this is an extreme feeling of loyalty to a nation, person, group, or organization. It could represent nationalism, fraternal loyalty, emotional debt, or any other strong connection.
For the purposes of harmony and discord, loyalty follows the same rules as love, except that loyalty applies to a large group. Also, if you are acting in accordance with the group’s philosophy, but against the order’s of one of its ranking members (or vice versa) then you are neither in harmony or discord.
Hatred: this may be considered as the opposite of love and loyalty; instead of strong, positive connections, you feel disgust with the subject of your hate, and wish them ill. It may apply to a single person, racial group, region, or nation.
You are in harmony whenever you are directly working to bring misfortune to the subject of your hate. You are in discord whenever you are treating them in a fair, kind way, or whenever you are cooperating with them.[/INDENT]
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
For brevity’s sake, I have excluded specific examples, but I will post them later if desired for clarity.
So, each character has a small set of personality aspects that are switching from discord, to harmony, to “off” according to the character’s actions. That’s fine for guiding roleplaying, but the second mechanic allows this system to expand to have real effect on the game.
Methodology represents the particular way in which you view your place in the world. It tells you how your harmony and discord affect your psyche, what will drive or discourage you. Each character may have one, and only one methodology
[INDENT]Western: the western mind is always seeking change, latching onto whatever idea excites it at the moment. A westerner seeks to satisfy as many of his goals as possible, but realizes that perfection is impossible. He can accept contradiction in his own beliefs, but this limits his spiritual conviction.
If you are in harmony with more personality aspects than discord, you receive a +1 bonus to all attack rolls, skill checks, and saving throws. If you are in discord with more aspects than you are in harmony with, you suffer a -1 penalty instead.
Eastern: the eastern mind seeks harmony and perfection. An easterner believes that it is possible to attain a state where actions, beliefs, and goals coincide to reinforce the individual’s dedication and performance. He has great conviction, but cannot tolerate disturbances to his psyche.
You must have at least two personality aspects. If you are in harmony with all of your personality aspects, you receive a +2 bonus to your attack rolls, skill checks, and saving throws. If you are in discord with any aspects, you suffer a -2 penalty to those rolls instead.
Stoic: the stoic mind dissociates itself from strong emotions and discourages rash reactions, favoring slow, methodic thought instead. A stoic believes in temperance and moderation; he seeks his goals in a careful, mild way. He has a steady, if mild, conviction, but becomes lost and unsure if he is forced to work counter to his beliefs.
You may not have love or hatred personality aspects. If you are in discord with any of your personality aspects, you suffer a -2 penalty to attack rolls, skill checks, and saving throws; if you are not in discord with any aspects, you gain a +1 bonus to these rolls instead.
Fanatic: the fanatic focuses on a single belief, and feels great enthusiasm for it, to an almost unreasonable degree. A fanatic seeks only to adhere to this goal, no matter the costs. A fanatic’s conviction is considerable in pursuit of his obsession, but he is emotionally immature regarding nearly anything else.
You may only have one personality aspect. If you are in harmony with this aspect, you receive a +2 bonus to attack rolls, skill check, and saving throws. If you are not in harmony or discord, you suffer a -1 penalty instead. If you are in discord, you suffer a -3 penalty.[/INDENT]
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
So, if you’re still with me, you’ve got a system wherein with just a handful of simple choices, you’ve got a highly detailed personality with explicitly described beliefs and goals. In a group, each character will be striving to bring about harmony for themselves. This opens up the possibility of deep and complex interactions between characters, fostering greater roleplaying at the table.
The only drawback is that obviously, this system is more complex that alignment. The upshot is that characters are not bound to nebulous, generalized, and highly circumstantial definitions of good and evil. They are not forced to conform to stereotypes of law and chaos.
A character who considers themselves "good" could take belief: life, and love: self, leading to a character who is very self-centered, but who cares strongly for the lives (if not the well-being) of others. In the alignment system, this would fall between good and evil, but wouldn't quite be neutral.
Likewise, someone who believes themselves to be rational and lawful may have a loyalty to a particular religion or nation, but would not feel that they needed to obey arbitrary or unjust applications of that nation's laws. The methodology mechanic opens up other options, such as a person who is fanatical about enforcing the law, doing whatever it takes to bring justice and order to the land. In the alignment system, this would be neither lawful, chaotic, or neutral, even though it is clearly a valid personality type.
I hope to hear some insightful critiques, along with your personal take on this particular alignment alternative.
This is an interesting take on "alignment," but unfortunately, as you have already stated, it is very very complex, even more so than standard Alignment rules. With this system, you can easily have your Stoic Loyal Paladin (Eastern Methodology), but the one problem I foresee is that without clear-cut alignment (ha!) spells and abilities such as smite evil become that much more fuzzy. (let alone the arguments that inevitably will come about debating whether a character is following their Personality/Methodology)
If I, as Strongarm the Loyal Stoic Paladin of St. HelpingGuy wish to Smite Evil, what qualifies? There is no Evil, so the ability would have to be altered somehow (obviously). Would the Smite harm everything opposed to your current quest? or everything declared as an enemy by the player? If such hefty penalties as described in the OP are going to be used, perhaps the latter would be more useful. If the Paladin starts to run around, declaring that everyone in the entire town is his enemy (just to cover all eventualities), he is clearly not acting his Personality, and the DM can quickly put a stop to the behavior with the penalties.
Unfortunately, the loophole of "but my character is a Fanatic, he really does consider everyone his enemy!" comes in.
Flaws aside, this is an excellent system for devising how to Roleplay a character. It occurs to me that this system could be used in tandem with Alignment. Every character has their own codes and beliefs, and with your system, they can have them down on paper. Everyone benefits, both the DM and players, from having circumstantial modifiers due to Harmony/Discord levels. In addition, if the DM doesn't think he/she can handle the extra numbers, this is still a perfect method for fleshing out the main NPCs in the campaign.
This is really an excellent idea, and well presented. I applaud your efforts here. Please continue refining this system to perfection (or as close as it can conceivably get).
*I am in no way am endorsing the Alignment system with my comments above.*
More deeply, I'm concerned that the system encourages cookie-cutter characters in a way that alignment doesn't. Because the advantages in this system are mechanical, rather than personal, it seems to encourage reduction of character types to a few salient features. (Why bother thinking about what my character merely likes or dislikes, when I need loves and hatreds to fill out his Personality Aspects?)
Do paladins get "Smite: Hate: Life"?
btw, you have to add "PEACH" to avoid stupid replies I've been always against the alignment system. I hate to say to my paladin, "Yes, he is bad."
Defining a person by their loves and hates is a good way to define a character. It would tend to make characters define themselves by what they want to do and their motivators, rather than their philosophical mentality.
Putting bonuses to all die rolls is a fallback to the WW mentality of needing to give a 'bonus' to a player for playing their character the way they were intended. The problem with that is many of the spectacular actors of the group will do such a great job at attaining happiness for their characters and will blow the other characters away statistically. A more difficult to play character (with Love: hometown and Loyalty: the kingdom) will be less effective when they conflict.
That said, interesting concept. How many facets would you recommend for an average player to use? 2? 5?
I understand where you get the 'Western'/'Eastern', but maybe come up with something that fits into more of a generic setting.
One recommendation: For the Love aspect, I would allow a loved object to be replaced by another one after a level or something like that. People often find new things to 'attach' to and IMO is easier to replace than a loved living person.
Personally, I think that the morality trait in the World of Darkness works well, since it is a scale of how concerned the character is with how he/she treats others, as opposed to a specific list of traits.
As a DM, I find many players -- particularly newbies -- could benefit from help understanding HOW to play a character unlike themselves. It's one thing to say, "Aramil the elf is brash;" it is another to know how to play brash and meet with success instead of ending up in a dragon's stomach.
The current alignment system is somewhat helpful for this. For example, Aramil the elf is confronted with a difficult situation. His alignment is Chaotic Neutral. How might Aramil (not the player) react? If treated as a personality theory as well as a moral and ethical framework, he could: act randomly, make a self-serving choice, look for a risky opportunity, stick his thumb at the guards, strike out on his own, etc. Alas, alignment does not say much about how to do this skillfully, but it's a start.
What I might suggest to a player with a self-described brash character is: "actively look for and ask about opportunities, and purse any and all that others shirk from, so long as the likely consequences aren't irreversible." This is very specific and gives the player role-playing actions to take: question NPCs about opportunities, ask the DM whether NPCs and other players are hesitating or fearful to act, consider the statistical odds of success, etc.)
What I'm suggesting is, character strategies might be helpful to many players (and DMs running umpteen NPCs), particularly for players who aren't sure how to translate interior conflicts or moral-ethical frameworks into outward behavior.
For Paladins all you would have to do is change his smite evil ability to just smite like the shadowbane inquisitor in CA. With the adjustments to spells I mentioned above, the paladin isn't just a champion of good and law, he is now every variant from paladin of freedom to paladin of slaughter. It would even encompass the blackguard prestige class. (You wanna be a fallen paladin? sure just change beliefs and smite other things. There you don't even need to exchange levels!)
In short, I wanna get using it ASAP! Too bad I'm in the middle of a campaign that might be hard to switch.
Kudos. I've copied your idea to a folder on my computer and the next time I begin a campaign I fully plan to incorporate your genius.
The only issue is, of course, alignment based spells. Perhaps individual things like loyalty can be ranked, or a rough guideline given, but that won't work all the time -- hate may be often seen as evil, but a character that hates the wicked can hardly be said to simply be evil.
Perhaps something like the morality system in the World of Darkness system might be appropriate? That is less absolute than alignments, but it can be used to gauge how much a character values the lives and rights of others, i.e., how good or evil the character is.
If I, as Strongarm the Loyal Stoic Paladin of St. HelpingGuy wish to Smite Evil, what qualifies? There is no Evil, so the ability would have to be altered somehow (obviously). Would the Smite harm everything opposed to your current quest? or everything declared as an enemy by the player?
This may seem odd, but yes, when I use this system, smite can be used on anything that the character has a real, RP reason to hate. It couldn't be used on say, a random bear in the middle of the woods, but it could be used on that same bear were it attacking a helpless commoner (the bear still isn't evil, but now the character has a real reason to be fighting it). I will address paladin’s specifically momentarily.
In particular, "Western" and "Eastern" are triggering my cringe reflexes
Here, I am referring simply to frames of mind. "Eastern" and "Western" don't translate to geographic locations, but rather to psychological tendencies that are forced on the individual by the society. The paladin, clearly a western conception, has, in this system, an eastern methodology. And I promise, we are, by degrees, getting to the paladin issue...
Putting bonuses to all die rolls is a fallback to the WW mentality of needing to give a 'bonus' to a player for playing their character the way they were intended.
Noted. This is why I consider the entire "Methodology" mechanic to be an optional rule. The system works without it, but my personal taste is to reward RP with real advantages.
I know this doesn’t float every DM's boat, and I can understand that. As for the issue of some players choosing aspect's that are "easier" to achieve harmony with, this is a regrettable flaw, which can only be amended by careful intervention on the part of the DM during character creation.
That said, interesting concept. How many facets would you recommend for an average player to use? 2? 5?
My recommendation is at least two, but of course this could vary. If a player is dying to have more aspects, I would consider allowing feat that gave them 3-4 more. Note that anything more than three becomes difficult to deal with, I believe that two provides a good interplay without being too overbearing.
One recommendation: For the Love aspect, I would allow a loved object to be replaced by another one after a level or something like that.
Done.
For Paladins all you would have to do is change his smite evil ability to just smite like the shadowbane inquisitor in CA. With the adjustments to spells I mentioned above, the paladin isn't just a champion of good and law, he is now every variant from paladin of freedom to paladin of slaughter
This was precisely my intention. The hard-lines of alignment are sundered, while the system of morality and personality is intact.
Now, the issue of alignment-based spells and in particular, the paladin, is of some concern in this system. If you want a "strict" interpretation of a LG paladin, make the following changes: replace detect evil with detect lies, replace smite evil with the smite ability of the Shadowbane Inquisitor from CA (as a previous poster has suggested). Then, require them to have the personality aspects: Belief (life), and Loyalty (church / holy order) and give them the Eastern methodology.
Alignment-based spells can be easily reworked, as some posters have inferred, by a combination of DM judgment, and the ruling that the protection series of spells simply works against those who violate your beliefs.
First, I'll cover just a few specific personality aspects, so that everyone can see more clearly how they operate. However, remember that this system is intended to be very open-ended, and players and DM alike are encouraged to create exactly the personality aspects that best suit the character.
In all cases, the DM and players should work together to define the character’s beliefs, and what qualifies as harmony or discord. I general, a belief that could come up more often should either be more “difficult” to achieve harmony with, or it should be “easier” to be in discord with.
Belief (non-violence): you disdain combat and violence in all its forms. Perhaps you seek to lead others to higher a spiritual purpose by your actions, or maybe you have sworn an oath to never kill again. You are in harmony when you refuse to use lethal force while being attacked, or when you are acting to prevent violence. You are in discord for the duration of any encounter in which you voluntarily attempt to deal lethal damage. If you use any sort of death attack or coup de grace, you lose this aspect permanently
Belief (poverty): abstaining from all mortal possessions, you carry only what is absolutely necessary for your survival. This may represent a rite of humility, a monk's vow of poverty, or any deep sense of separation from worldly possessions. You are in harmony when you are carrying only enough food and water to support yourself, and a minimal amount of gear and supplies totaling in value no more than 50g. You are in discord whenever you are carrying anything with the intent to sell it for personal gain.
Love (self): you value your own well-being and survival above other’s. You may be cowardly, self-centered, or simply emotionally insecure. You are in harmony whenever you are protecting yourself while others around you put themselves at risk. You are in discord if you are knowingly putting yourself in danger, or if you see to the protection of others before yourself
Hate (life): you are consumed with a hatred for all living things, you exist solely to facilitate the extinction of everything around you. You are in harmony for the duration of any encounter in which you have dealt lethal damage. You are in discord whenever you are working to protect a life. If you ever prevent or help prevent a death, or cast any healing or resurrection spell, you lose this personality aspect.
Victor, a knight-errant who left his training to become an adventurer, has become infatuated with the party's cleric, Suan. With a charisma score of 14, he has two personality aspects: belief (chivalry), and love (Suan). Victor was raised in a society that harbors dissident beliefs and values individualism, he has a Western methodology.
Suan, a pragmatic worshiper of a dark goddess, has no time or patience for Victor's affections. With her wisdom score of 16, Suan has three personality aspects: loyalty (church of Hecate), love (self), and hatred (Victor). Suan comes from a society that values community over individualism, stressing cooperation and obedience, she has an Eastern methodology.
Foolishly, Victor volunteers to be the frontline warrior, seeking to impress Suan. During combat, he acts to guard and protect her, putting him in harmony with both his personality aspects, and garnering him a +1 bonus. Suan is glad that he is trying to get himself killed, but most of the time, she is not specifically working for the church of Hecate, therefore she receives no bonus.
When the party encounters a ruined temple, Suan insists on investigating. She is looking for clues that this temple's god could prove a threat to her own. She orders Victor in fist, putting herself safely at the back of the party. This serves all of her personality aspects, and she will receive a +2 bonus ofr the duration of the adventure in the temple, so long as she doesn’t go out of her way to help anyone else, particularly Victor.
Later, the party decides to split up to search a series of catacombs. Suan, eager to rid herself of Victor, sends him with the other group. Now he is in discord with his belief (chivalry) aspect, but in harmony with love (Suan), because he is obeying her requests, and thus will gain no bonus.
Love (self): you value your own well-being and survival above other’s. You may be cowardly, self-centered, or simply emotionally insecure. You are in harmony whenever you are protecting yourself while others around you put themselves at risk. You are in discord if you are knowingly putting yourself in danger, or if you see to the protection of others before yourself
What if helping others helps yourself? Sure, you're at the back of the party, but standing around while others are getting slaughtered doesn't help you at all, and, in the end, if putting yourself in danger's way helps you save a valued friend/servant/whatever who constantly allows you to remain out of danger, then it would make more sense to do that, in the long run.
Hate (life): you are consumed with a hatred for all living things, you exist solely to facilitate the extinction of everything around you. You are in harmony for the duration of any encounter in which you have dealt lethal damage. You are in discord whenever you are working to protect a life. If you ever prevent or help prevent a death, or cast any healing or resurrection spell, you lose this personality aspect.
So, if you hate life, but you are working with someone who also hates life, your serial-killer "brother in arms", as it were, and you heal them so you can kill others more effectively, then why would that be a bad thing? If anything, you'd be ending up killing more, so I can't see this being lost for healing such an ally.
For example, in Star Wars, Palpatine would have Hate (Jedi). Now, he may go around helping Jedi through Episode I and II as needed, but that doesn't mean that he still doesn't hate Jedi, since it's just leading to him taking over and wiping them out in Episode III.
Basically, what I'm getting at is when to be smart vs. sticking with the aspect. Sometimes, you have to make sacrifices of your short term aspect for greater gain down the road, and I don't think that should cause something like a permanent loss of an aspect (unless it's something obvious, like a love/hate where you end up with the focus of the aspect being destroyed). This would be especially true of a Stoic Methodology, since that favors thinking things out.
There are a few things I'm a bit shaky on -- here are some examples:
What if helping others helps yourself? Sure, you're at the back of the party, but standing around while others are getting slaughtered doesn't help you at all, and, in the end, if putting yourself in danger's way helps you save a valued friend/servant/whatever who constantly allows you to remain out of danger, then it would make more sense to do that, in the long run.
Hate (life): you are consumed with a hatred for all living things, you exist solely to facilitate the extinction of everything around you. You are in harmony for the duration of any encounter in which you have dealt lethal damage. You are in discord whenever you are working to protect a life. If you ever prevent or help prevent a death, or cast any healing or resurrection spell, you lose this personality aspect.
So, if you hate life, but you are working with someone who also hates life, your serial-killer "brother in arms", as it were, and you heal them so you can kill others more effectively, then why would that be a bad thing? If anything, you'd be ending up killing more, so I can't see this being lost for healing such an ally.
For example, in Star Wars, Palpatine would have Hate (Jedi). Now, he may go around helping Jedi through Episode I and II as needed, but that doesn't mean that he still doesn't hate Jedi, since it's just leading to him taking over and wiping them out in Episode III.
Basically, what I'm getting at is when to be smart vs. sticking with the aspect. Sometimes, you have to make sacrifices of your short term aspect for greater gain down the road, and I don't think that should cause something like a permanent loss of an aspect (unless it's something obvious, like a love/hate where you end up with the focus of the aspect being destroyed). This would be especially true of a Stoic Methodology, since that favors thinking things out.
Let me elaborate: these personality aspects are deep seated reactions that are conditioned into the psyche at a very deep level. These are the summation of a lifetime of observation, sensation, and reaction. Emotional connections built up over the years to firmly establish what we like, and what we don't like. When we are faced with these things, there is no conscious choice to react. It is automatic. For the purpose of personality aspects, only your explicit actions, not your intentions nor your esoteric thought processes matter.
Third, do remember that none of these aspects are set in stone. These are not set in stone. Each should be crafted for the individual character, with an eye towards general balance. I intentionally made the Hate (life) aspect so severe because firstly, it would almost always be "on", and secondly, because a person would have to be quite deeply disturbed to develop such an aberrant personality anyways!
I suppose I wrote in haste; I should have made clearer that these are to be considered on a case-by-case basis, each aspect judged based on the characters history and personality, and on a general principal of equity.
Derrick, this is indeed a highly intricate system, but if you look closely, you can see that it is not nearly as difficult to use as you might expect. Each character is going to have a small set of aspects, and he, the party, and the DM will become quite familiar with them after a short while. It becomes a matter of semantics on par with such frequent problems as, "does the hobgoblin really get cover from here? He's only about halfway behind that wall from where I'm standing?" Furthermore, most personality aspects will be definitively in harmony or discord for the duration of an encounter, and often a whole adventure.
I counter your supposition that this is destructive to roleplaying with the following question; is it less immersive to wonder if a certain action falls within your characters goals, loves, and beliefs, or less immersive to wonder if those actions fall within one of nine ambiguously defined alignments?
Also, you will note that firstly, a +1, or at the most, +2 bonus is roughly equivalent to Bless or Inspire Courage, both available at first level, and furthermore that the system can just as easily work against a player, and secondly, that the system does not actually require any rolling, so your (near) labeling of "rollplaying" would seem to have been a misnomer.
Furthermore, I would posit that there is such a vast host of other means to ruin immersion that this may be considered, at most, a minor sin. If I wanted total immersion, I wouldn't allow any books at the table, nor dice, nor even character sheets, these being but barriers preventing total roleplaying immersion; however, I am of the school of thought that says, "rolling dice is fun", and as such, I do indeed allow for all of these wicked tools of metagaming, among which, this system might be considered the least significant.
I counter your supposition that this is destructive to roleplaying with the following question; is it less immersive to wonder if a certain action falls within your characters goals, loves, and beliefs, or less immersive to wonder if those actions fall within one of nine ambiguously defined alignments?
If your group has character alignments changing encounter by encounter, you are simply not playing the same game as I am. If your group does not change alignment encounter by encounter, but rather, occasionally considers the possibility that a character's stated alignment does not fit the way that they are portrayed, then the dichotomy you're presenting is flawed: your system requires getting dragged out of character in game on a semi-regular basis, whereas the RAW for alignment require considering a character's behaviour after the fact.
Also, you will note that firstly, a +1, or at the most, +2 bonus is roughly equivalent to Bless or Inspire Courage, both available at first level, and furthermore that the system can just as easily work against a player, and secondly, that the system does not actually require any rolling, so your (near) labeling of "rollplaying" would seem to have been a misnomer.
Your proposal aims to subordinate role-playing to the tactical aspect of the game. I don't think that calling it "rollplaying" is really that inaccurate, it's just that I think the label has been consistently misused.
Furthermore, I would posit that there is such a vast host of other means to ruin immersion that this may be considered, at most, a minor sin. If I wanted total immersion, I wouldn't allow any books at the table, nor dice, nor even character sheets, these being but barriers preventing total roleplaying immersion; however, I am of the school of thought that says, "rolling dice is fun", and as such, I do indeed allow for all of these wicked tools of metagaming, among which, this system might be considered the least significant.
So, your real complaint with alignment is that it lacks sufficient mechanical impact on the tactical game? In that case, I'll have to come back to this proposal later and evaluate it for balance.
I personally would use this idea IN CONJUNCTION with alignment, using it as a sort of thing to control my PCs so they would stop doing things against their alignments. (Drinking alcohol obsessively is NOT the kind of thing a LG worshiper of Heronius would do.)