I couldn't help but think to myself about how much I dislike the Alignment system that is integral to the Dungeons & Dragons world as I read the Diamond Lake Backdrop. In the Players handbook, they make it very clear that the world is indeed good vs. evil, but point out that a good person can do an evil act like an evil person can do a good act.
Why have it (the alignment system) at all? It seems like Monte Cooke agrees with this, as his own gaming world is devoid (in my quick review) of this structured Alignment garbage.
I'm looking at all of these Diamond Lake NPCs, and I may be wrong, but its like I could envision Erik saying that everyone's (well, most everyone) alignment is Neutral because they wouldn't necessarily have an alignment; afterall, these people aren't taking up arms to oppose the stronger Alignment to maintain balance.
I mentioned adding the VP/WP, and armor/weapon fatigue changes to D&D 4E, but I think I would like to see Alignment system changes also.
Instead of "Protection from Evil", how about:
"Protection from Devils/Demons"
"Protection from Outsiders"
"Protection from Hostiles"
etc.
....know what I mean?
This has got to be the prickliest subject in D&D, IMO. No two people have the same view on alignments.
There are many number of dings against the alignment system we could list here, but I'll point out one of the things I like about it.
Alignments are a great way for players to immerse themselves in the role-playing aspect of the game. It's pretty much the foundation of how a character will respond to any given situation; its ethical and moral bent in life.
How many times have you heard something like this, "Well, I know I should go help Boffo the halfling free himself from the spider webs before that big spider eats him, but my character is Chaotic Neutral and I think he might be more interested in saving his own skin..."?
Anyway, a good role-playing element of the game, but also a hard label to pin on a person since most people slide up and down the alignment scale frequently.
BTW, what part of LV do you live in, IGR? I'm out in North Las Vegas near Ann Rd. & Decatur.
Why have it (the alignment system) at all? It seems like Monte Cooke agrees with this, as his own gaming world is devoid (in my quick review) of this structured Alignment garbage.
And, in many people's opinions, Arcana Unearthed suffers a bit for it. It's always seemed a bit "unfocused" to me, and I know I'm not alone in that.
I'm looking at all of these Diamond Lake NPCs, and I may be wrong, but its like I could envision Erik saying that everyone's (well, most everyone) alignment is Neutral because they wouldn't necessarily have an alignment; afterall, these people aren't taking up arms to oppose the stronger Alignment to maintain balance.
Which is true of most people, period.
Neutral is the "undecided" alignment. In my games, I've kept it from being conflated with "active neutrality" akin to the True Neutral alignment from older versions of the game by calling the "active neutrality" alignment "Balanced". This solves the problem nicely, and most people are happily ensconced in the "Neutral" bins.
Alignments are a great way for players to immerse themselves in the role-playing aspect of the game. It's pretty much the foundation of how a character will respond to any given situation; its ethical and moral bent in life.
How many times have you heard something like this, "Well, I know I should go help Boffo the halfling free himself from the spider webs before that big spider eats him, but my character is Chaotic Neutral and I think he might be more interested in saving his own skin..."?
And as a result, most of my "personality challenged" players select Chaotic Neutral as their alignment of choice since it gives them the most freedom to do what they tend to like to do.....which of course is whatever they want.
BTW, what part of LV do you live in, IGR? I'm out in North Las Vegas near Ann Rd. & Decatur.
I live at Craig and Camino Al Norte (near Eldorado area)...apparently not too far away. This heat is causing me to make Fort saves to avoid subdual damage....
Whenever I meet new gamers and they tell me "I always play Chaotic Neutral" it's about the same as meeting someone who openly admits "I perform sexual favors for meth". Chaotic Neutral is why I hate the alignment system, all the other aspects of it that are anoying I think I can deal with, just so long as the next players handbook describes in detail that Chaotic Neutral doesnt equal Psychotic Stupid.
As far as I've seen the alignment system is more trouble than it's worth. The player's I've played with either pick an alignment that sounds good, and then act however they would act, or pick the same alignment repeatedly (CN for my former party, typicaly CG or NG for the people I'm with now) and act however they would normaly act. In short, at least the people I game with, don't actualy play their alignment until their reminded to. The character responds to the situation just how the player thinks he himself would, regardless of alignment (and class more often than not). I find it easier to just forget about alignment (and all those horrible little spells based on alignment) and just tell the players before hand "alright, remember guys this campaign is supposed to be a little heroic, you don't need to play paladins, but if you want to play a necromancer I'm going to need a good explenation".
BTW, what part of LV do you live in, IGR? I'm out in North Las Vegas near Ann Rd. & Decatur.I live at Craig and Camino Al Norte (near Eldorado area)...apparently not too far away. This heat is causing me to make Fort saves to avoid subdual damage....
Wow! That's pretty dang close. I'm actually in the Eldorado community, just off of Tropical and Camino Eldorado. It's a small world, after all. It's a small world after all. (sing along!)
This is funny, its reminds me of the other night when my gaming group was making up new Star Wars characters. I made up a Falleen Scoundrel and our GM asked me what he was like, what his goals were, etc.
I launched into a discription of his character that he wasn't against killing but considered it messy, that he didn't look to exploit others as it made him seem weak, that he might like certain people and would put himself out for them, but in general was arrogant and selfish. I mentioned that he has big long term plans but is always looking for quick thrills as well, which is why he is no longer a part of his families businesses, legal or otherwise. I also mentioned that depending on how the rest of the party went, he could become much nastier or even develop a deep concience, and that I really wanted to play up how he interacted with others and what he took in from his experiences.
Then the GM says, "If this were D&D what alignment would he be?"
Neutral . . .
Yeah, personally I'm not a big fan of alignment, in D&D or in life.
Most (read: basically all) people, real and imaginary, are a blend of virtues and vices.
For this reason, I prefer to do without alignment for characters in D&D, although I find it's still great to have Outsiders that are the incarnations of virtue(s) and vice(s) for the sake of some great battles with simple moral clarity.
FWIW, Monte Cook's Arcana Evolved has ditched alignment.
Also, Dragon Issue 323 has alternate rules for handling alignment differently:
"See No Evil
by Michael Tresca
What if paladins couldn’t detect evil? What if no one could? Check out the spells that give players new options in games that blur the line between black and white."
Chief Creative Officer, Publisher
|
I'm going to go out on a limb, here.
I love alignment.
I love it for two reasons. First, I love it because in two little letters I can get a pretty quick impression of what an NPC or monster is all about. Sure, it's overly simple and inadequate for capturing the complexity of emotional creatures, but it's a hell of a lot better than reading a five-sentence essay when all I really want to know is how the character might react to a threatening or diplomatic situation.
Secondly, I love it because the alignment system is integral to the game. The entire D&D multiverse is built upon it, and the planes are the physical manifestation of it.
I appreciate that settings like Eberron have their own planar cosmologies, because I think different is interesting, as a diversion. But I'm sticking with the Great Wheel because it is cool, and because it is a major part of what makes D&D D&D.
At least for me.
--Erik
PS: I think the neutral alignment is robust enough to include both the "balance" types and the disinterested types. There's more than one kind of chaotic evil, and there's certainly more than one kind of chaotic neutral, as pointed out upthread.
I once had a campaign where I required every character to begin at 1st-level with a Neutral alignment, unless they were a class that forced them to be of a particular alignment, and even then, they had to be as close to Neutral as possible. This means only Paladins were Lawful Good (as it turns out, no one choose a Paladin) and other than Paladins only Monks are Lawful (one player choose to play a Monk). It worked out enormously well.
My reasoning for the campaign was that the player characters were all inexperienced and therefore mostly "undecided" on the moral and ethical axes. Only those who had undergone rigorous training and exposure to a particular moral or ethic (like Clerics, Paladins, or Monks) could have developed a non-Neutral alignment at such a young age. None of my players argued with it, and most really liked the idea.
I agree with Erik on this one though. I really like the alignment system for the simplicity it gives to an already complex game. Detailed descriptions of motivations and beliefs are better suited for novels. Alignment is a nice, concise way to get a basic portrait of a character across and I think that is a strength of the D&D game, not a weakness.
I think Erik makes a good point.
The thing that I object to most strongly in-game is not that alignment exists, for I do think it functions as an effective shorthand in an otherwise mechanically complicated game. Rather, I don't like the fact that it is so easily detectable.
Following that capability to its logical conclusion would lead to the mass incarceration or slaughter of people opposed to the generally accepted alignment of most every community.
I still haven't settled on how I want to handle it in my campaign, but am leaning toward limiting the effectiveness of Detect X and Protection from X to outsiders, and possibly those directly in league with them.
- r
Regarding Neutral alignment, I kind of dig it in it's "Balanced" or "True Neutral" variety. Very Joseph Campbell.
I actually don't like DMing "undecided" characters. This is, after all, an epic game of architypal conflict. Choose sides, folks. : )
Other the other hand, I do like airwalkrr's strategy because it forces the players to *demonstrate* that their characters are a particular alignment. Show me don't tell me.
- rob
Alignment is pretty integral to my "home-brew" campaign, which has a completely different cosmology. For instance, instead of Inner and Outer Planes, I've rearranged them into the Physical Planes (elemental planes) and Moral Planes (the great wheel), which sit on either side of the Prime in diametic opposition.
The Cosmology suggests that there are only two philosopical questions:
1. What IS it? (elements)
2. What SHOULD it be? (morality)
Furthermore, everything is connected by the Plane of Conscious Possibility, which creates the temporal flow of energies between the reality of Prime existence and the polar pull of each of the two philosophical questions. It also sets up the general rules of the Infinite Prime Material Planes (which is why Oreth, Toril, Krynn, Athas and, um. . . Earth are so similiar, even though they represent infinite possibilites). It is theroized in the game that there are also an Infintie number of Conscious Possibility Planes, but they are literally beyond comprehension and represent pure madness (Far Realms is only one of a possible infinity of them).
Anyway, to "get on with it," the real "Enemy" of the my Plane of Conscious Possibility is the Plane of Stasis and it's four realms of anti-alignments: Apathy, Hedonism, Fantasia, and Dogma. As the banality of civilizations grow, the borders of Conscoius Possibility begin to shudder, creating these anti-alignments in the population, leading to the demise of Consciousness itself, with all of its conflicting dualities and existential constructions.
As long as the struggle of Good vs. Evil, Law vs. Chaos continues, then the Plane of Stasis has no power. That is why the "Adventurer" is the true Hero, regardless of whether they are considered Good or Evil, as they infuse reality with intense, dynamic struggle.
I also play Villanous NPCs with as much bravery, valor, and perspective as I can. They have as much to lose by the denizens of the Stasis Plane as any goody two-shoes Paladin.
Well, sorry about the long post: I really wanted to say that I like Alignment and it is not set in stone. A DM can adapt and use the core concepts however they wish. I guess all the above mess is a description of how I'm trying to do that.
- Chris
Speaking as a person who tends to quantify everything (whenever possible) I was a fan of the Neverwinter Nights system for alignment. Each character had a score between 1 and 100 for each axis and every time you performed an action that was good, evil, lawful, or chaotic, you gained or lost points on the axis based on how extreme your actions were. You could start wherever you wanted, but over time the characters alignment would shift according to his actions.
So, if you killed the mugger who was assaulting you, you might lose points on the law/chaos axis, whereas if you captured him and turned him over to the authorities, you might gain points on the axis (with 1 being totally chaotic and 100 being totally lawful). Over time (with no actions taken either way), the alignments would slowly drift toward neutral.
In my campaign, I would further quantify this by saying that spells that affect a particular alignment (such as detect evil or smite evil) only apply to you if your score is within 10 of the most extreme possible. So detect evil would only work on someone who is really evil (with a score of 1-10), they consistently and repeatedly commit evil acts.
Of course, this requires a tremendous amount of bookkeeping, and is probably unrealistic for anyone but the most organized DM. So, I don't actually use the whole system. But I would like to.
:)
My own ranger character will likely shift alignment soon from CG to NG. For the past couple of levels he has been somewhat unwillingly shoved into a quasi-leadership role and has begun to insist that people start following 'the rules.' There will likely be some interesting RP opportunities as he struggles with what is really important to him - his old sense of freedom and independence or his evolving sense of duty. In this way alignment is a helpful little way of marking character development.
Yeah. . . great example.
I wonder how much group dynamics, and the DM's plan, play into things. You may have an idea at 1st level what your alignment is, but you are also a very green adventurer, and experience may show him/her a different path. Plus, the group dynamics might scream for you to take a role your character was originally designed for, as in the above example.
On a side note, the Blackguard is a prestige class that digs fallen Paladins. Does anyone know of similar prestige classes that have beneifts for fallen aligments or class requirements, Like Ex-monks who become chaotic, and so on? I've never seen anything like this, but I bet it would be cool.
On a side note, the Blackguard is a prestige class that digs fallen Paladins. Does anyone know of similar prestige classes that have beneifts for fallen aligments or class requirements, Like Ex-monks who become chaotic, and so on? I've never seen anything like this, but I bet it would be cool.
An example: in Unnaproachable East, you have "the Durthan". This is basically a cold-themed witch of Rashemen which works against the established order (i.e. the Hathrans).
If you are a Hathran and wants to switch side and join the evil sisterhood, you can swap your Hathran PrC levels for Durthan levels.
But, it is not exactly the same as Paladin/Blackguard: you do not get extra abilities for having been a Hathran before becoming a Durthan. This is simply a nice way to replace abilities that you would otherwise be losing because you no longer qualify for a PrC (because of alignment/betraying your organisation).
Bocklin
I have a theory about the overwhelming popularity of the CN alignment amongst players. It's the DM's fault!! See, every time a player runs a Lawful character, whenever that character wants to attack and kill everybody in a bar for no reason and then burn down the bar to hide the evidence, the DM says, "Your LAWFUL character would never DO that!"
After hearing that for the tenth time, most players abandon their high ideals.
I say, if you're a DM and you truly want your players to run PCs with Lawful alignments, tell your players that beginning today, in your campaign it's a LAWFUL ACT to attack and kill people in bars for no reason and burn down those bars afterwards. If you do this, viola! Problem solved!
Oh. One more thing. It should also be a lawful act to kill an alchemist and take his potions, especially if your PC refuses to waste his money on over-priced potions because he is saving-up to build an orphanage.
:)
Tony M
I have seen DM try to inflict Lawfullness to the extreem before. First off, as I pointed out to one of my players recently, his LG cleric is most likely traditionally LG about 75% of the time. At other times he might act NG or LN without it really affecting his overall alignment.
His character is a cleric of Helm that drinks rather often. It gets him into many awkward social situations, and he was worried about his "lawfulness." So far it has been more a matter of him being in the wrong place at the wrong time than outright chaotic brawling, and in fact many times he has used his clerical abilities to stop fights (enlaring himself to hold back combatants, using command to cause someone to . . . well it stopped the fight, lets leave it at that).
The point is, he respects authority, beleives society should have rules that are followed, and would put himself in danger to protect an innocent, so he is lawful good. Even if he does end up passing out at a bar when he knows he won't be on duty.
(Although I have told him "exalted" feats, prestige classes might be out unless he changes)
Another example I almost forgot . . .
I had a player that ran a paladin that was a practical joker. He never joked in combat or with authority when recieving a mission. But when the party was in obvious "down time" he starting in with some rather elaborate jokes.
Some of the other party members swore the character was chaotic, but as I pointed out, he never questioned missions he was sent on, never did anything in combat or in transit the hindered the party in any way, and was generally very focused when something needed doing.
...I had a player that ran a paladin that was a practical joker. He never joked in combat or with authority when recieving a mission. But when the party was in obvious "down time" he starting in with some rather elaborate jokes...
Sounds like a gnomish paladin to me (tee hee).
...some of the other party members swore the character was chaotic, but...
But, if you can hold off with the pranks until the appropriate time...well, that sounds pretty responsible to me (TRANSLATION: LAWFUL).
Anyway, I've always felt that True Neutral/Balanced was very difficult to play--probably as difficult as Lawful Good, or any other extreme alignment. I've never bought the concept of an undecided neutral character. Sooner or later, every one of these folks will lean one way or the other...even if that means doing only what saves their skin (like any self-respecting Chaotic Neutral). No side is still a side.
Yeah, its been said: I love alignment.
LG
Anyway, to "get on with it," the real "Enemy" of the my Plane of Conscious Possibility is the Plane of Stasis and it's four realms of anti-alignments: Apathy, Hedonism, Fantasia, and Dogma. As the banality of civilizations grow, the borders of Conscoius Possibility begin to shudder, creating these anti-alignments in the population, leading to the demise of Consciousness itself, with all of its conflicting dualities and existential constructions.
As long as the struggle of Good vs. Evil, Law vs. Chaos continues, then the Plane of Stasis has no power. That is why the "Adventurer" is the true Hero, regardless of whether they are considered Good or Evil, as they infuse reality with intense, dynamic struggle.
I also play Villanous NPCs with as much bravery, valor, and perspective as I can. They have as much to lose by the denizens of the Stasis Plane as any goody two-shoes Paladin.
Wow. I really liked this description. Thanks.
I had a player that ran a paladin that was a practical joker. He never joked in combat or with authority when recieving a mission. But when the party was in obvious "down time" he starting in with some rather elaborate jokes.
Some of the other party members swore the character was chaotic, but as I pointed out, he never questioned missions he was sent on, never did anything in combat or in transit the hindered the party in any way, and was generally very focused when something needed doing.
So, some of your players think being lawful means you have no sense of humor? Good for you for setting them straight.
This is part of the problem with alignment. Real people are a blend of characteristics, not archetypes.
Personally, I don't use it.
Than again, I don't play D&D, I just translate stuff D&D and other fantasy RPGs into a homebrew FUDGE system.
Sometimes (if I'm using a setting like Greyhawk that came from D&D), the characters will still BELIEVE in the importance of ideologies like Law and Chaos and Good and Evil, but they're not required to write anything about it on their character sheets and those beliefs don't have any more mechanical or magical significance than our own philosphies in the real world do.
Just like in pretty much all fiction not based on D&D, we still have no problem with depicting satisfying bad guys, good guys and such. We just don't label them according to an arcane system. I mean, is Luke Skywalker Lawful Good or Neutral Good? Who cares! Only a D&Der would ever think to ask (or be able to understand the question). It's enough for everyone who's ever watched Star Wars that he's the hero.
...is Luke Skywalker Lawful Good or Neutral Good? Who cares! Only a D&Der would ever think to ask...
At least we're not wondering whether or not he's LN, N, CN, LE, NE, or CE...at least! Who cares if he's CG?
LG.
four realms of anti-alignments: Apathy, Hedonism, Fantasia, and Dogma.
Wow! A game in which my real life atitudes would make me a paladin!!!
Well... maybe if I cared enough to do it that is...