I am thinking about the change to the Protection and Magic Circle spells, and while I agree they were too good at protecting against mental influence, I wonder about the hole left by this change. Specifically, the True Neutral alignment.
It always bothered me a little before that Holy Word/Dictum/Blasphemy/Word of Chaos had one alignment that couldn't be touched. I think those are particularly nasty SoS spells though, and I'm not a big fan of SoS in the game, so I was ok with it. I guess my primary problem is that True Neutral actually seems an alignment that gives a mechanical advantage over the others.
My preference is for all alignments to be more or less even in terms of mechanics, so that the choice is really about roleplaying and not for optimization.
So, I'm wondering if there should be a suite of spells that target neutrality. I can see it from a flavor perspective as well. There has got to be some zealot somewhere that can't stand the idea of a "fence sitter" alignment who would come up with them, and the sheer usefulness of the spells would make them common. After all, this would allow you to affect/protect against 5 alignments rather than 3, and it would mean that each alignment can be targeted by two spells rather than one.
So, am I way off base, or do I have something here?
Edit: forgot the quote that inspired me: "I hate these filthy neutrals Kif! With enemies you know where they stand but with neutrals? Who knows! It sickens me."
I am thinking about the change to the Protection and Magic Circle spells, and while I agree they were too good at protecting against mental influence, I wonder about the hole left by this change. Specifically, the True Neutral alignment.
It always bothered me a little before that Holy Word/Dictum/Blasphemy/Word of Chaos had one alignment that couldn't be touched. I think those are particularly nasty SoS spells though, and I'm not a big fan of SoS in the game, so I was ok with it. I guess my primary problem is that True Neutral actually seems an alignment that gives a mechanical advantage over the others.
My preference is for all alignments to be more or less even in terms of mechanics, so that the choice is really about roleplaying and not for optimization.
So, I'm wondering if there should be a suite of spells that target neutrality. I can see it from a flavor perspective as well. There has got to be some zealot somewhere that can't stand the idea of a "fence sitter" alignment who would come up with them, and the sheer usefulness of the spells would make them common. After all, this would allow you to affect/protect against 5 alignments rather than 3, and it would mean that each alignment can be targeted by two spells rather than one.
So, am I way off base, or do I have something here?
Edit: forgot the quote that inspired me: "I hate these filthy neutrals Kif! With enemies you know where they stand but with neutrals? Who knows! It sickens me."
I have had simmilar ideas myself and I think it would be fairly easy to implement since you would just have to designate N as the option during preparation/casting.
In my Heroes of Alvena campaign, Neutral is treated as 1/2 of the other alignments. To be more precise, they are subject to all good/evil based mechanics, but they are only affected half as much - where applicable.
So Neutral creatures take damage from both Holy and Unholy Weapons which deal +1d6 to them, are subject to Smite Evil and Smite Good which grant 1/2 the Paladin's smite benefits against them.
Being aligned means you suffer full damage or effects, but in turn are generally immune to your associated effects (a paladin doesn't take extra damage from a holy weapon, for example).
It always bothered me too that in D&D the "True Neutral" was a mechanically superior alignment. So, in my campaign, it's not. It's just as good as any other alignment, since it's partially resistant to everything but invulnerable to nothing.
EDIT: Also, it means you can guard against neutral creatures via spells like protection from evil and use magic circle properly, since they're treated as being that alignment.
I mean...you could make a spell like that but...why bother?
I mean...you could make a spell like that but...why bother?I see what you did there ;)
What did he do, I missed it.
I say we as DMs and GMs start systematically killing off the PC that are true neutral and maybe Chaotic neutral as well. We don't say anything just kill them off the next time you play, unless the player is a girl we need to keep them around, just not enough of them. This might be a better plan then making spell ageist them, plus Proactive is the counter to indifference.
and meatrace is funny,
All of the significant alignment based effects target anyone not of that alignment.
You're right. I must have either been thinking of 3.0 where neutral got a lesser effect, or some house rule or something, as the quartet I named would toast TN.
So, that concern is out.
I still think some sort of mental protection against TN should exist, outside of Mind Blank. Maybe there is such an effect and I'm just missing it.
How very neutral of you! j/k
Don't forget:
"When you use a summoning spell to summon a creature with an alignment or elemental subtype, it is a spell of that type. Creatures on Table 10–1 marked with an “*” are summoned with the celestial template, if you are good, and the fiendish template, if you are evil. If you are neutral, you may choose which template to apply to the creature. Creatures marked with an “*” always have an alignment that matches yours, regardless of their usual alignment. Summoning these creatures makes the summoning spell's type match your alignment.
and
"When you use a summoning spell to summon a creature with an alignment or elemental subtype, it is a spell of that type. All creatures summoned with this spell without alignment subtypes have an alignment that matches yours, regardless of their usual alignment. Summoning these creatures makes the summoning spell's type match your alignment. "
Yeah, it always bothered me when players chose an alignment to avoid spell effects.
Tru neutral is the most difficult alignement to play... It's something very alien for human to grasp... ;)
You have to be an animal and not think at all or something that is very powerful and live long enough to grasp what the cosmic balance can be like a dragon or a neutral outsider...
Such characters tend to appears only from time to time to help one side or the other and most of the time only as grey eminence...
To be true neutral as a player you have to live outside of civilization, to be an ermite, detached of all material things... ;)
An adventurer has to make choice and his choices always bring him toward an alignement...
As a DM I use a slightly modified version of the alignement chart.
In mine there's three circle, let's call them true neutral, really neutral and neutral. The true neutral circle is a 5 point diameter circle, the really neutral a 10 points diameter and the neutral a 15 points diameter... meaning you are "in the neutral zone from 0 to 30 points. True neutral are not affected by aligned spell, be it for good or bad. really neutral take 1/4 of the effects, neutral 1/2 half, the others take full effects...
Paladins or Clerics who are in neutral areas for all two alignement (or single if he has only one) has they spells and powers reduced by 1/4 (god is not happy !!! :D ), in really neutral they're reduced at half the power and true neutral no power (but not fallen yet ;) )
True neutral gods cleric can go to really neutral without any effect, if they become neutral they go half power then if aligned no more power... ;)
It may seems a bit complicated but in play it's simple... :p
Tru neutral is the most difficult alignement to play... It's something very alien for human to grasp... ;)
Just the opposite. Nearly every human being in the real world I would say is Neutral, with mild tendencies toward this or that. In the end, we make decisions based on what is best for us so long as it doesn't significantly adversely affect people we care about. We don't go out of our way to be beneficent and altruistic, we go about our existence eating sleeping and mating until we die, with no great rights wronged or injustices done. I'm neutral. I've done some bad things, which I don't feel great about but whatever, and I can be a nice guy. I obey the law, but only because I don't want hassle and I hate cops and authority figures. I'm a very analytical person and organized in my mind, but you'd never know it by seeing my apartment.
Neutral is your average Joe who isn't out to harm anyone, but isn't doing anything in the grand scheme of things to help either. He just wants to be left alone to persue his interests and get by.
Anything else, to me, is unnatural.
Just the opposite. Nearly every human being in the real world I would say is Neutral
Yep, I agree... 99% of the human population is Neutral... But I use the term : True Neutral... ;)
True Neutral is more the "Zen Bouddha", completely detached of contingency... or the animal living only by instinct... Or the more than human creature that knows about cosmic balance...Most human tend to be good... Not in the D&D full sense but more than in the chart sense, they are more neutral than good but still more good than evil... let's go for "a bit good", which is reflected in the chart by the greys area ;)
Just the opposite. Nearly every human being in the real world I would say is NeutralYep, I agree... 99% of the human population is Neutral... But I use the term : True Neutral... ;)
True Neutral is more the "Zen Bouddha", completely detached of contingency... or the animal living only by instinct... Or the more than human creature that knows about cosmic balance...Most human tend to be good... Not in the D&D full sense but more than in the chart sense, they are more neutral than good but still more good than evil... let's go for "a bit good", which is reflected in the chart by the greys area ;)
You clearly haven't met any...people.
People may be, by and large, nice but they are not D&D good by any stretch of the imagination or we wouldn't have things like war, violent crime, or Justin Bieber. I will agree that people have a tendency, minutely slight, towards good and lawful behavior. Only because we live in a society of laws (therefore following said laws is in one's own interest) and because "good" behaviors tend to engender friendly feelings from others (also in our best interest). However, I would argue that one's actions do not necessarily dictate their alignment as much as their intentions/motives.
A Zen Bhuddist would be Lawful Neutral btw.
Tru neutral is the most difficult alignement to play... It's something very alien for human to grasp... ;)Just the opposite. Nearly every human being in the real world I would say is Neutral, with mild tendencies toward this or that. In the end, we make decisions based on what is best for us so long as it doesn't significantly adversely affect people we care about. We don't go out of our way to be beneficent and altruistic, we go about our existence eating sleeping and mating until we die, with no great rights wronged or injustices done. I'm neutral. I've done some bad things, which I don't feel great about but whatever, and I can be a nice guy. I obey the law, but only because I don't want hassle and I hate cops and authority figures. I'm a very analytical person and organized in my mind, but you'd never know it by seeing my apartment.
Neutral is your average Joe who isn't out to harm anyone, but isn't doing anything in the grand scheme of things to help either. He just wants to be left alone to persue his interests and get by.
Anything else, to me, is unnatural.
I agree too.
PRD
Neutral: A neutral character does what seems to be a good idea. She doesn't feel strongly one way or the other when it comes to good vs. evil or law vs. chaos ( and thus neutral is sometimes called "true neutral" ). Most neutral characters exhibit a lack of conviction or bias rather than a commitment to neutrality. Such a character probably thinks of good as better than evil - after all, she would rather have good neighbors and rulers than evil ones. Still, she's not personally committed to upholding good in any abstract or universal way.
Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run.
Neutral means you act naturally in any situation, without prejudice or compulsion.
Its the second type, that I have issues with. Those are the neutrals I just can't get a good grasp on :/
Edit: Oh, and in regards to the original post, I never have encountered abuse of this sort in my games. So, honestly, I do not think I would ever implement the "indifference" adjustments. Though, I do feel sometimes that CN is picked alot by players so they can be "good" yet do something really bad to avoid any alignment issues. *smiles* Come to that, I also have issues understanding what CN really is. But that is WAY offtopic.
Some neutral characters, on the other hand, commit themselves philosophically to neutrality. They see good, evil, law, and chaos as prejudices and dangerous extremes. They advocate the middle way of neutrality as the best, most balanced road in the long run.Those are the neutrals I just can't get a good grasp on :/
Think of a druid, far removed from society. He's dedicated to nature, and to the Balance. The Balance is the most important thing, too much Good, or too much Evil (or Law, or Chaos) will irreparably damage things and cause a catastrophe. If you save all the cute deer, they'll overpopulate and run out of space and other animals/plants will suffer. If you kill all the feral wolves, same thing. Only with Balance can nature be maintained. It's the way things were meant to be, and it's up to those with true insight to maintain it. Life and Death are part of the cycle, and interfering with that can be disastrous. Goblins and Humans were both part of this land originally, helping either side to wipe out the other does not serve the Balance.
What makes a man turn neutral? Lust for gold? Power? Or were you just born with a heart full of neutrality?
The real question is...
What makes a man go neutral? With good or evil, I know where I stand, but you just can't trust those neutral....
I think they're just born with a heart full of neutrality.
The real question is...
What makes a man go neutral?
His clutch went out?
|
You clearly haven't met any...people.A Zen Bhuddist would be Lawful Neutral btw.
a) he said not in the d&D sense. And I have met TONS of people and agree, most are generally good, despite what you think.
b) If you think a Zen Buddhist is lawful, you don't know anything about them. You might want to go meet some real ones.
I think the problem isn't so much that there are spells that hurt you to be good, but that there's NO benefit for being good unless your class requires you to be good. Some spells should give you a boost for doing the right thing to make up for the ways that the evil will screw you over
So, I'm wondering if there should be a suite of spells that target neutrality.
All I know is my gut says maybe.
His clutch went out?The real question is...
What makes a man go neutral?
I lold