I've traditionally run my 3.5E D&D games without alignment. It's solved a lot of problems for that system (namely, the Paladin evil-radar annoyance).
Are there situations where you feel it might cause problems in the PATHFINDER rules?
Jay H
Break? BREAK? No more detect evil/smite on sight??? NOOOOOOO!!!!!
You may need to house rule a paladin smite class feature and protection spells, but break not so much. Mr. Fishy rules that detect evil only detect "evil" creatures (dragons/outsiders/clerics), mortals only show evil if they're commiting an evil act or they're truly evil
(human monster). It squashes the Paladin's detect/smite combo on shady NPCs.
I would suggest looking over the detect evil spell again. Most humans don't register on it already, and it's not always active, the paladin has to concentrate on it, which if he is the face of the party might betray itself in a bit of a momentary distraction.
Also it's not like undetectable alignment is a higher level spell or doesn't have a 24 hour duration.
|
Some would say that, not only does it not break the game, but it improves it.
I'm not the one to say such a thing, seeing that I have no experience in running an alignmentless prpg game (or a 3.5 one, at that). But I hear enough gripes about it that people do consider it. None in my group is willing to strip alignment out of the system, mostly due to laziness or unwillingness to do that amount of work.
Aside from the Detect o'Matic (aka paladin) the only "problem" would be handling Clerics and what gods they can and can not worship and any class with an alignment portion to the requirements.
Monks being lawful, barbarians being chaotic, or whatever.
(not that its a problem to just eliminate that requirement- but you should at least be aware it exists).
-S
To some people, alignments are useful (beyond the Paladin stuff, that is). There are some people, for instance, who really want to play a ROLE (that is, not play themselves fitted with magical items in a fantasy setting), but who lack the imagination to build themselves a proper background. To them, alignment is a guideline to what their character usually does in certain situations. Fun can be had by really playing characters of different alignments.
I have played and mastered role-playing games for several years now, and have always played with alignments, so my view could be skewed here. In our earlier years, our group was ticked by alignments and the detection thereof. Seems that now only powerful or specific characters have an echo on the alignment radar, which is good. We, too, have seen too often the paladin going berserk on the slightest echo from their Detect Evil ability, with the mere justification of "But he's evil!". Which is evil, by the way I think. Just remember History...
Just a few thoughts, here, no say on going either way.
|
Aside from the Detect o'Matic (aka paladin) the only "problem" would be handling Clerics and what gods they can and can not worship and any class with an alignment portion to the requirements.
Eliminating the labels and rubber stamps (undead are EVIL...doesn't matter if they are mindless, they are EVIL!) doesn't eliminate the concepts of good and evil, or order and chaos. Plenty of RPGs without alignments exist, yet many characters played in those games could comfortably fit into one of the 9 alignments. So I would say that priests should follow a god that at least roughly corresponds to their moral and ethical leanings. Likewise, you could simply say paladins must fallow a code that values order and high moral fiber above all things.
I personally find the concept of no alignment system appealing. 4E's approach does kind of make me scratch my head. Apparently Law only exists if you are good, and chaos only exists if you are evil? Maybe PHB 4 will add more alignments?
|
If you can break your players and yourself of the good/evil as philosophical concepts, you can replace evil in the game with TAINT from the Heroes of Horror rules.
Evil then becomes something tangible, rather than abstract.
Evil is a essential a type of dark matter, radiation, poison, or the like.
A serial killer may behave evilly, but he might not be tainted so he would not register as evil.
A vile, abusive, man on the street however, might be behaving that way because he is tainted, and therefore would register as evil.
Evil clerics would be tainted by the supernatural beings they truck with.
Evil Outsiders would obviously be fully tainted as well.
If you wanted to get really in depth, you could also created an opposing enegry/matter of goodness, called Purity or the like (though HoH does have specific rules for it, extrapolation wouldn't be difficult.)
Besides the specifics mentioned above (when does a paladin get to smite, what does protection from x work on) if your players dont need the alignment guidelines to help them role play a character, I dont see why alignments are neccessary. I think that the whole evil good lawful chaotic rubber stamp is so subjective it can be done away with, and let people use character backgrounds and personalities determine behavior. It is a little harder on the dm though, because sometimes that rubber stamp is useful when you are managing a dozen different npcs.
I suspect the largest issue will be clearing it (and the implications it has for the game) with the players. In the long run so long as everyone is on the same page I don't think it's going to hurt things too much.
It also helps if you avoid certain things as outsiders and undead. Plenty of games can be played without having to touch on the areas most impacted by alignment.
Yes it does. I guess everyone else was just being nice, but if you aren't using alignments in your D&D game, then you aren't playing D&D. It doesn't just break the game, it destroys it...
I've traditionally run my 3.5E D&D games without alignment. It's solved a lot of problems for that system (namely, the Paladin evil-radar annoyance). Are there situations where you feel it might cause problems in the PATHFINDER rules? Jay H
Thanks. So far, I can't see any reason then why the Pathfinder game would be affected negatively by removing alignments (other than in a "roleplaying" sense). Technically, I dumped alignment as a "rule" way back in 1988 when 2e came out and we never had a problem then either..but I wondered if the Pathfinder /SYSTEM/ would be affected..apparently not.
We've always done what one of the recent posters noted "Smite/Protect from 'enemy/opponent" and have gotten rid of "detect" in all senses except for when the player can justify it.
I really, really, really, really detest the paladin's evil-radar and any of the party in-fighting B.S. that emerges because of stupid players too.
jh
I've run without traditional alignments in a number of games over the years, and pathfinder has definitely been forgiving to that choice.
As others have observed, the paladin gets a bit nerfed, and a couple of class abilities no longer make sense (ki strike lawful). For the paladin in my current game, we agreed on the universally smite-viable targets:
-Supernaturally evil creatures, such as demons, devils, and those with the fiendish template. Anything with the evil subtype.
And circumstantially, these other groups might apply:
-Persons and creatures that pose a deadly and immediate-to-soon threat to innocents. This covers the orcs raiding your town, or the wererats dragging folks into the sewers.
-Persons and creatures that are a perpetual threat to innocents. This covers the red dragon that routinely empties the nearby village of it's maidens, and the lich emperor bent on conquest.
Needless to say, the pally doesn't get to use her smite very often. That's okay, because she's still the most dangerous member of the party, and as long as the party behaves itself, the big bads tend to be valid targets.
Yes it does. I guess everyone else was just being nice, but if you aren't using alignments in your D&D game, then you aren't playing D&D. It doesn't just break the game, it destroys it...
In what way?
There are certain spells that do certain things, depending on alignment, but other than that its not really needed. You will have to rework or replace those spells since I know demons use them. I think "chaos hammer" is a spell that works like that.
|
|
Yes it does. I guess everyone else was just being nice, but if you aren't using alignments in your D&D game, then you aren't playing D&D. It doesn't just break the game, it destroys it...
Luckily, I play Pathfinder.
Hell, I don't even think most special abilities/spells that refer to good/evil need to be changed all that much. Just use intent instead of rubber-stamping everyone's alignment across their forehead. Isn't that how most of them actually work anyway?
I ran a 3.5 campaign with no alignments for several years. I've never been terribly keen on alignment systems no matter their stripe or color...but I've always been more of a moral relativist than anything else.
For the 3.5 campaign I allowed clerics and paladins to detect heathen/infidel, and of course the ever popular smite infidel. The campaign had very serious religious themes and the faith of a character was very important.
The various protection from alignment spells were turned into Protective Circle sort of spells with the same general effects against any sort of outsider.
CJ