As the game is now True Neutral represents a bit of a bonus as players actions are not clearly restricted by alignment, they can gain many of the benefits of any alignment (clerics can chose to channel positive or negative fore example) they are not singled out by spells like detect evil/good or smite and a neutural person can consievably use a Holy sword and Unholy armor because they dont trigger either penalty.
ETC ETC.
what changes do you think would be fair in attempting to balance this?
some ideas i have are...
SPELL LIMITS: I am not sure what details yet but some kind of minor penalty to spells if your neutural representing less devotion to a specific god.. or maybe special allignment only spells.
WEAPON LIMITS: In my games a GOOD weapon can ONLY be used to full effect by a GOOD character. when a GOOD aligned weapon is used by a neutral character it does not have a penalty but is effectively a simple +1 weapon in the neutral players hands.
I have other ideas but wonder if any one else has comments on the matter.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I have not experienced a problem with this. I would say leave it alone.
Master Arminas
|
I'd suggest changing a few things. Aligned spells can only be cast by (divine casters only) casters that actually have that alignment. So TN divine casters can't use any aligned magic, but this only actually hinders a select few, mostly Druids who honestly do not have many aligned spells. When I say aligned spells, for this purpose I mean specifically those that affect or protect against an Alignment. Holy Word, Protection for Chaos, and Blasphemy all count, while Animate Dead (an Evil descriptor spell) does not.
Secondly, all neutral alignments can be affected by alignment spells as if they are all alignments, rather than not having an alignment. This has two major affects. #1, it turns that advantage into a penulty, but one that probably will not come up much. When it does, though, it can be a bit harsh on a failed save. #2 it does require that parties be built a little more along a common alignment scheme, because this will make what would otherwise be minimal friendly fire into potentually threatening damage and affects.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, many of a true neutrals character's summons go right through protection from X spells.
I would include more effects in the game that grant bonuses to good characters: ancient statues, monoliths, ritual combat that actually DOES favor the champion in the right, barriers that let good characters pass through etc
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Put me down with the "not a problem" crowd.
It might be worth giving us specific examples of how TN has given someone an advantage at your table — that way, we could conceivably debunk some rules misunderstandings to help you.
|
|
It might be worth giving us specific examples of how TN has given someone an advantage at your table — that way, we could conceivably debunk some rules misunderstandings to help you.
Unhindered by Protection From______ or Magic Circle, either unaffected by or take the bare minimal from most Alignment based magic, Unaffected by all Aligned weapons (Holy), and do not have any RP alignment "your character wouldn't do that, they are ______ ________".
|
TN cannot use mind-controling spells on characters under Protection spells. The only thing the protected character misses out on is the +2 to AC and immunity to touch from summoned creatures, and that is only against one alignment anyway. You would have to have Protection from Good/Evil/Law/Chaos (four castings) all cast before the TN has an advantage over everyone else.
Extraplanar summons are hedged by protection from alignment regardless of the alignment of the summon or summoner, or the caster of the spell.Also, many of a true neutrals character's summons go right through protection from X spells.
Nope, they hedged that out of the protection from evil rules from 3.5 to pathfinder.
|
|
Protection from Evil
School abjuration [good]; Level cleric 1, paladin 1, sorcerer/wizard 1
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V, S, M/DF
Range touch
Target creature touched
Duration 1 min./level (D)
Saving Throw Will negates (harmless); Spell Resistance no; see text
This spell wards a creature from attacks by evil creatures, from mental control, and from summoned creatures. It creates a magical barrier around the subject at a distance of 1 foot. The barrier moves with the subject and has three major effects.
First, the subject gains a +2 deflection bonus to AC and a +2 resistance bonus on saves. Both these bonuses apply against attacks made or effects created by evil creatures.
Second, the subject immediately receives another saving throw (if one was allowed to begin with) against any spells or effects that possess or exercise mental control over the creature (including enchantment [charm] effects and enchantment [compulsion] effects, such as charm person, command, and dominate person. This saving throw is made with a +2 morale bonus, using the same DC as the original effect. If successful, such effects are suppressed for the duration of this spell. The effects resume when the duration of this spell expires. While under the effects of this spell, the target is immune to any new attempts to possess or exercise mental control over the target. This spell does not expel a controlling life force (such as a ghost or spellcaster using magic jar), but it does prevent them from controlling the target. This second effect only functions against spells and effects created by evil creatures or objects, subject to GM discretion.
Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by evil summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Summoned creatures that are not evil are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.
Third, the spell prevents bodily contact by evil summoned creatures. This causes the natural weapon attacks of such creatures to fail and the creatures to recoil if such attacks require touching the warded creature. Summoned creatures that are not evil are immune to this effect. The protection against contact by summoned creatures ends if the warded creature makes an attack against or tries to force the barrier against the blocked creature. Spell resistance can allow a creature to overcome this protection and touch the warded creature.
|
|
I think this would be a better idea for Alignment based spells. . .
Holy Word
School evocation [good, sonic]; Level cleric 7
Casting Time 1 standard action
Components V
Range 40 ft.
Area nongood creatures in a 40-ft.-radius spread centered on you
Duration instantaneous
Saving Throw Will partial; Spell Resistance yes
Any nongood creature within the area of a holy word spell suffers the following ill effects.
HD Effect
Equal to caster level Deafened
Up to caster level –1 Blinded, deafened
Up to caster level –5 Paralyzed, blinded, deafened
Up to caster level –10 Killed, paralyzed, blinded, deafened
"Nongood" rather than "Evil".
I think you have a solution in search of a problem.
Reminds me of this guy I saw who decided he had to put a bigger cooling fan in his RX-7....radiator fluid everywhere!!!!
As the game is now True Neutral represents a bit of a bonus as players actions are not clearly restricted by alignment...
True Neutral is not the 'do anything you want' alignment. If your reffing it that way the problem is not the alignment.
True Neutral has beleifs it sticks to and that limits their activities just as much, if not more, that other alignments and if your not playing it that way then yes, your players will get away with everything.
Re-read the description of true neutral and then read evil. Remember, the characters are NOT evil so they should NOT be doing what evil does, saying their neutral and then getting away with it.
Then reread good. Neutral does not act good either.
A properly played and enforced True Neutral is not a problem.
As the game is now True Neutral represents a bit of a bonus as players actions are not clearly restricted by alignment...True Neutral is not the 'do anything you want' alignment.
Yeah. That's chaotic neutral.
Yeah. That's chaotic neutral.As the game is now True Neutral represents a bit of a bonus as players actions are not clearly restricted by alignment...True Neutral is not the 'do anything you want' alignment.
Nope that is not it either. Chaotic Evil is. Chaotic Neutral is still neutral. Chaotic Evil is the only alignment where you can really do anything at all and have almost no aligment conflicts whatsoever, with the caveat that you must maintain your Evil by being evil.
There are spell that can hurt good but not evil characters and vice-versa. Both of these spells type hurt the neutral guy.
Evil or Good cleric with a neutral buddy after casting such spells: "Sorry dude you should make a stand for something." :)
The only difference between chaotic neutral and chaotic evil is the c/n guy just kinda feels bad about it, whereas the c/e guy thinks it was funny.
Being neutral is punishment enough in and of itsself, imho. It's like being a baguette that can do complex tasks.
I was in a situation where two of my chaotic good party members took part in breaking into a warehouse on the docks, killing the guards inside, stole the coffee and drugs that were stored inside to sell them, and then burned down the warehouse for no apparent reason. The GM is reconsidering their alignments.
The morale of the story is that alignment choice should telegraph your player's intentions for their character. Let them choose the alignment they want and make changes if they prove to actually be followers of a different one. Alignment choice should only be restricted when the class demands it.
|
As the game is now True Neutral represents a bit of a bonus as players actions are not clearly restricted by alignment, they can gain many of the benefits of any alignment (clerics can chose to channel positive or negative fore example) they are not singled out by spells like detect evil/good or smite and a neutural person can consievably use a Holy sword and Unholy armor because they dont trigger either penalty.
Their actions balance it. They won't be willing to put themselves in harms way for others. They will turn coat rather than holding up their end of a bargain, if they decide that is better for them. The populace won't see them as particularly heroic or trustworthy. They won't in fact see them as any better than they are, just more powerful. They won't be treated as well by folks as good-aligned adventurers would be. There are things that they won't be able to do, lest they start to slide towards good.
If they are playing true-neutral, police it and track any deviations.
Don't channellers only get to choose whether to channel positive or negative once, the first time they do it? That's how I've always run it...
I do think that there might be a place in the game for a -1 or -2 for every alignment step you are removed from someone for a Diplomacy check, not sure.
Penalize behavior, not alignment. Alignment isn't a straight-jacket to bludgeon players or PCs with; it's a world view that is (in most cases) somewhat malleable.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Chaotic neutral is "I'll do anythiing i want... but i won't do THAT"
They can take a road cone and wear it for a hat. They cannot kill orphans and wear them for a hat.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Chaotic neutral is basically being selfish, but you are not willing to do the things that a CE person would such as killing without giving it a 2nd thought.
I guess I am saying a CN has enough morals to not commit certain actions "just because".
|
I tend towards the extremes with alignment in general: either I'm going to ignore it for the most part (almost entirely fluff), or I'm going to integrate it in my campaign and houserules completely (highly mechanical).
When I take the highly mechanical approach, I have a system to rate any time the party engages in an Aligned Action (something one alignment would be for, while another alignment would be against).
Each half of the alignment is rated from 0 (Evil/Chaotic) to 100 (Good/Lawful), with 45-55 being Neutral.
Each Aligned Action is rated from 1 (Minor) to 5 (Major).
Anytime a character engages in an Aligned Action, he rolls percentiles. If it's a Good or Lawful action, he adds the rating to his alignment; if he rolls equal to or higher than that, the action's rating is added to his alignment. For Evil or Chaotic actions, the rating is subtracted from his alignment; if he rolls equal to or less than that, the action's rating is subtracted from his alignment.
Based on actual rating of alignment, Aligned Effects work differently: a spell that does 6d6 against "evil creatures" might only do 2d6 if the target's Good/Evil alignment is a 40 or so. It might even do 8d8 if the alignment is really low (5 or so).
I like using Aligned Areas, similar to Planes with the aligned planar trait. I like to mix it up some.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Protection from MealyMouthedness/WishyWashyness
Level 1 Spell
This spell functions as Protection from Good/Evil/Law/Chaos, only it targets those without the intestinal fortitude to actually take a stand on something. =}
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Protection from MealyMouthedness/WishyWashyness
Level 1 SpellThis spell functions as Protection from Good/Evil/Law/Chaos, only it targets those without the intestinal fortitude to actually take a stand on something. =}
Vocal component - "Get some NUTS!"
I ran into this problem in my Kingmaker game. I have a group of heroic PCs who pretty much do all good acts. So after a few session, when they ran into a enemy cleric, it used protection from good only to have all but one of the party members pipe in that they were neutral. Despite their multitude of good actions and traits they insisted they were still really neutral and were resistant(to put it mildly) to me pointing out that if they continually do good actions they are good no matter what their sheet says. In the end I nearly abolished alignment altogether, but since not enough of the players were happy with that either I just am going along with it and letting the PCs be good characters with neutral on their sheet.
You should have done the bad guys the same favor. :)
Chaotic neutral is basically being selfish, but you are not willing to do the things that a CE person would such as killing without giving it a 2nd thought.
I guess I am saying a CN has enough morals to not commit certain actions "just because".
I am a slaad.
There is a group of adventurers that I and my cohorts have at our mercy. I could find a cow or some other animal, or maybe a dispicable orc or bugbear, but.......I think I'll just implant my egg in one of them, thus condemning them to the same fate as Ash from Alien.
No matter how many times I perform this horrible act on another intelligent being, I will always be.......chaotic neutral.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I found the true Neutral alignment to be a mildly annoying bit of power gaming in some cases.
The problem is that alignment has a million restrictions, but no benefits. And all of those restrictions are based on things opposed to your alignment.
For example:
"Chaotic, Evil, Good, and Lawful Spells: A cleric can't cast spells of an alignment opposed to her own or her deity's (if she has one). Spells associated with particular alignments are indicated by the chaotic, evil, good, and lawful descriptors in their spell descriptions."
I guess you could rule that anything that doesn't have a little neutral in it is opposed, but that doesn't fix the vast majority of problems.
The only solution that I came up with is to use role-play, and campaign setting aspects to reward an alignment choice. Want healing? Well, they aren't going to be too fond of Neutral folks at the Good Temple. And when it comes to buying a holy weapon or something, you best have your Paladin Benevolence Association card fully paid up!
I would suggest leaving it alone. If you really think it's unbalanced, force TN characters to pick a single alignment for them to be affected by. Chaos/Law or Good/Evil and have it only affect spells like Protection from X.
Those dang metagamers and their true neutral alignment.
Those dang metagamers and their true neutral alignment.
well, they are sociopaths........sharks with dolleyes.
While they players MAY have been abusing their Neutrality, I'd suggest this may not have been the best way to go about challenging it. Instead, when a PC is about to make a significant personal sacrifice in the cause of Good (or whatever) tell them "Just so you know, if you do this in the way you're describing, I'm going to suggest you change your alignment to Good". Then make it a discussion instead of an argument.
I tried that and it had, well let's just say mixed results. Some of the characters are open to the possibility of eventually changing to good, but for the most part all alignment discussions end badly and it's not worth, in my opinion, disrupting the game over trying to discuss whether their sacrifices or selfless actions in any particular moment are good or not.