Alignment as a Trait / Template


Advice

Sczarni

So I was pondering this,

Sometimes, players make bad choices and they go that far to change their character's alignment. So what about applying Evil alignment as a temporary template to their character or a trait? It can not only provide them guidelines how to handle their character but simply provide penalties to their choices and they don't even have to bother that much to be evil.

This would be only temporary Trait/Template which would work for Good/Neutral parties and would not be suited for the Evil aligned party/campaign. It would also pretty much be focused around Evil Alignment Trait/Template since that's what creates most problems.

So what do you think?

Don't start discussion's how alignment's are bad or that you don't use them. This isn't a topic for it.


I'm not sure what your proposing. How is this different then just shifting their alignment. Are you going to create specific templates and traits or just an your evil template. Just need a little clarification

Sczarni

Okay, let me put it this way.

Problem: All hell broke loose, one of your players character did something bad and they switched to some Evil alignment. Now I know that many players in my area whether in PFS or in my home campaign here wouldn't be able to play their new evil aligned character. They would metagame or simply pretend like nothing happened.

Possible solution: A Evil alignment trait/template. A different trait/template which is easily added to PC's character and voila, they are back on track.

I generally don't believe much in alignments, but I do believe in good and evil sides. If any of my PC's does and keeps doing evil things, their character should turn evil. Player's often have hard time in simulating anything which you tell them so I see this trait/template as simplification of alignment rules.

It would not be 100% correct, but it would be at least close enough.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber

I still don't get the difference. Is this something that you use in your games because you don't use alignment? What exactly is the difference?

Sczarni

This is an example of Lawful Evil Trait which I have been working on. Again, this is just example and completely not finished yet. This is why I am asking on forum if people had some interesting idea's.

Lawful Evil Trait:

Lawful Evil

Your actions, perhaps unintentional, changed your perspective and you feel more open minded now to the fact that everything is a tool to be used.

Benefit: Lawful Evil characters receive +4 to Bluff (to deceive only), Intimidate and Sense Motive checks due to their increased paranoia.

Penalties: Lawful Evil characters pick one zeal of their focus. Typically, this is their biggest desire, for example money, wealth, physical or mental power or such. They uphold this zeal to the best of their ability. At the beginning of each day character rolls a Will save to determine if their urge for zeal has been satisfied. If they fail, they cannot rest, sleep or eat until their zeal is satisfied. DC to resist their zeal is 10 + 1/2 the character's level + the character's wisdom modifier.

Additionally they receive the following penalties:

- They never give away their money to anyone unless under a death threat or worse. (Does not include shopping items for yourself)

- They always demand their exact share of any treasure found while venturing with the party.

- They never help anyone unless there is profit to be gained from it. Profit includes monetary reward or a personal favor from a well known and influenced noble figure.


I don't really get why this should be necessary. I mean, if the character's/PC's actions got him to shift in alignment, and he just continues as before, he IS already acting according to his new alignment, isn't he?

Edit: An afterthought...even if the character then started to act, let's say, good again. Why shouldn't he be allowed it (resulting in a new alignment shift somewhere along the way)? If it was allowed in the first place to "act out of alignment" and go so far that your alignment shifted, it should be equally allowed to "act out of alignment" again, with the result of another alingment shift if necessary.

Sczarni

CrazyGnomeLady wrote:

I don't really get why this should be necessary. I mean, if the character's/PC's actions got him to shift in alignment, and he just continues as before, he IS already acting according to his new alignment, isn't he?

He is indeed and nothing trait would stop him from doing his normal character interactions.

CrazyGnomeLady wrote:
Edit: An afterthought...even if the character then started to act, let's say, good again. Why shouldn't he be allowed it (resulting in a new alignment shift somewhere along the way)? If it was allowed in the first place to "act out of alignment" and go so far that your alignment shifted, it should be equally allowed to "act out of alignment" again, with the result of another alingment shift if necessary.

There was something which I forgot to mention. Every Evil Trait has a time limit. When the time limit passes (ingame speaking) and character has done no evil acts, his alignment switches back to his old self.

Idea is that you can't buy back your alignment by going around suddenly and helping poor peasants or donate 200gp to church and switch your alignment back.

It could be bought back with Atonement tho.

Grand Lodge

Won't you have to create a Lawful, Chaotic, and Good trait as well?

How will you have the base work? Will it be True Neutral?

This seems to be a way of simplifying things, by complicating them.


How do your players feel about this idea. I know a lot of players, me included would be rubbed the wrong way by the GM telling them they must act one way or another. I like the idea of giving them situational modifiers befits or penalties. However it seems like your giving them a paladin like code to go along with it and that really dips heavily into their role playing. What happens if they don't follow those rules or want to repent?

If your players are cool with this idea their doesn't seem to be anything wrong with it but I'd be pissed if a gm sprung this on me. You think I've become evil so now for the next few sessions I have to become a paragon of evil, no thanks.

Sczarni

@bbt

I see evil alignment as something bad, because being evil is bad thing for a PC. Point is to discourage them from doing evil things and simply put I don't care much about other alignments, only about evil ones.

It could be made for every alignment, but that seems to be striking hard at freedom of will to the PCs.

Sczarni

@Chaos
I didn't really ask my players yet. One is busy on work, second is sick, so I am presenting my idea on next session. I don't ever really do anything without their approval.

So what would you suggest? I don't see trait to be that harsh on "being evil".


hey never give away their money to anyone unless under a death threat or worse. (Does not include shopping items for yourself)

- They always demand their exact share of any treasure found while venturing with the party.

- They never help anyone unless there is profit to be gained from it. Profit includes monetary reward or a personal favor from a well known and influenced noble figure.

My problem is that these limits tell them how they have to act. Its not giving them penalties that effect the mechanics of game play or interaction, your telling them your char in x situation does y. IMO that's not the gm's job. Lets take the last trait not helping anyone. Lets say a PC has committed an admittedly evil act and the template would be applied. They no can't help anyone even if their original character would have done that. Their evil act may have nothing to do with that particular aspect of their personality but now they are pigeonholed into acting as a selfish prick in all situations. Your taking being lawful evil to the extreme. You say you think evil is bad then why force them to be more evil?

I'd prefer a system the imposed situational modifiers on the PC's. Interaction penalties as their evil deed becomes known. Some organizations won't deal with them or charge higher prices, ect. This way their evil causes the world to react to them differently rather then forcing them to act a certain way. It comes down to letting your players play the char they want too play and facing the consequences.

Shadow Lodge

I agree with Chaos Scion. The way to discourage evil acts is to give reasonable in-world consequences for them, such as negative reactions from NPCs or organizations, or criminal penalties if appropriate.

Grand Lodge

You could introduce the Taint mechanic from Heroes of Horror.


I think that people of good alignments can easily make bad decisions in times of extreme fear and stress that end up haunting them for the rest of their lives. If you've ever listened to stories from WWII vets about what they did in the war, you'll get what I mean. I've seen interviews where old men break down in tears recounting events where they killed enemy soldiers who have surrendered because they were afraid that person would kill them or their buddies later of if he was cut loose. They deeply regret that their actions, but saw no other alliterative. It doesn't make them evil so much as mark them as human beings that reacted to some of the most extreme circumstances a person can experience.
I think something like having a character make a will save, sliding difficulty based on stress factors from the day, before they go to sleep would be an interesting mechanic. If they fail, they have a regret fueled nightmare that leaves them fatigued the next day.

Sczarni

Chaos_Scion wrote:


I'd prefer a system the imposed situational modifiers on the PC's. Interaction penalties as their evil deed becomes known. Some organizations won't deal with them or charge higher prices, ect. This way their evil causes the world to react to them differently rather then forcing them to act a certain way. It comes down to letting your players play the char they want too play and facing the consequences.

There are many situations which just don't cover this, such as killing innocent child in middle of a abandoned house. How can you explain that some people suddenly don't like them? You can't.

The idea is to limit them for a small duration of the session plus it might provide even some funny roleplaying moments. You are right that it limits them, but it limits them with a reason but I did say that trait is just an unfinished example.

@bbt
What's Taint? I never heard of it. I'll check it out.

@Audrin
That is what I wanted to make, in some similar way, by introducing the zeal part of a trait. A regret for that act, but in a certain way, unconnected by that act itself but your idea seems quite nicer then mine.


Thanks, Malag. I hope you find it useful.

Sczarni

BBT you are genius. Taint system seems perfect for what I had in mind. I think my players will love it. I'll check out with them first and see their responses about it on next session before continuing with my initial idea.

Thanks everyone for responses so far!

Shadow Lodge

I also like the Taint system if you want a mechanic. You can even package it with Audrin_Noreys' guilty nightmares when your score reaches a certain range.


There are many situations which just don't cover this, such as killing innocent child in middle of a abandoned house. How can you explain that some people suddenly don't like them? You can't.

Glad you found a system that works for you but I still thought I'd respond for thoroughness. This is a world of magic and divine/extra planetary beings. Just because there was no one their doesn't mean there are no witnesses. The kill the kid and some one uses raise dead to solve the horrible crime. A powerful celestial becomes aware of it through divination or the evil taint that such an act causes. A demon begins recruiting the PC's because of their depraved actions. Just a few ideas if something like this comes up in the future.


I like Chaos Scion's idea there. In a lot of traditional d20 mythology human souls were a commodity for demons and devils and powerful humans were worth more. Those guys always have an eye on potential big scores.

Sczarni

To be honest, there is absolutely nothing wrong with that idea Scion, furthermore, it's great, but you see, each time player would do something bad I would have to come up with something to switch the balance yet again. Such constant balancekeeping can be a strain.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / Alignment as a Trait / Template All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice