Keeping track of player's alignment

[DM Bacon]

Is there a good system anywhere for keeping track of my players alignment?

For instance, they're all TN or XG, but if they commit an evil act is there a way to keep track of that numerically so I can judge whether or not they need to change?

Thanks

[Albatoonoe]

I'm not familiar with existing systems, but an upcoming core book for pathfinder is going to have an alignment tracking system. Ultimate Campaign, if you don't mind the (relatively) short wait.

[Cinderfist]

In the past what I have done is create a grid like a tick tack toe board.
Nine squares, 1 for each alignment. Then break each square down into a smaller grid of 9 rows and 9 columns.
The pc starts with a mark in the middle square of his alignment. As they take actions you can move them around the smaller squares.
If they draw close to the boarder of their alignment you can warn them or however you want to handle that. But if they cross over their alignment flips.

[DM Bacon]

Ah cool. Too bad there's no preview of that :)

[DEWN MOU'TAIN]

well just draw a large tic tac toe box.

in each box, draw another tic tac toe box.

done.

[Jason S]

DM Bacon wrote:

Is there a good system anywhere for keeping track of my players alignment?

For instance, they're all TN or XG, but if they commit an evil act is there a way to keep track of that numerically so I can judge whether or not they need to change?

Thanks

Your head. The alignment of a PC is what you (as GM) think it is, through hours of play. Everything doesn't need a system.

Also, alignment is just a shorthand of the PCs general views, don't let it handcuff the personality of the PC and make all PCs/NPCs of one alignment a carbon copy of each other.

The worst thing that can happen is that a player thinks "what would someone of alignment X do?"

In my AP campaign, I'm asking that the players don't pick or use an alignment. When or if needed, I will decide on their alignment based on their prior actions.

[iLaifire]

Jason S wrote:

Your head. The alignment of a PC is what you (as GM) think it is, through hours of play. Everything doesn't need a system.

Also, alignment is just a shorthand of the PCs general views, don't let it handcuff the personality of the PC and make all PCs/NPCs of one alignment a carbon copy of each other.

The problem is that alignment is used in the rules as part of character abilities (Cleric's channel energy), spells (protection against X spells), and even class requirements (paladin's must be LG or lose all class abilities). Either those things need to be dropped from the core rules, or an explicit system of tracking alignment must be added. Otherwise it is almost like saying which classes can use simple, martial or exotic weapons, but never listing which weapons fall into which group. The problem as this will need to be a large list even to give a basic idea (a LG character who selflessly risks their life for an innocent pushes their alignment towards good much less then a CE character would).

[rangerjeff]

Well Jason S, a lot of people are uncomfortable with the alignment system, and you're free to run it however you want. But there are a lot of mechanics built around alignment, so downplaying it will be problematic at times (when your warrior tries to pick up the lawful only sword just to discover sorry but you're neutral, etc.)

And DM Bacon, alignment tracking is done in CRPG's with a 1-100 scale. Neutral is 31-70 and Lawful/Good are 71-100 and Chaotic/Evil are 1-30. Let your players express their alignment numerically within this framework. I.e., my Cleric is 75/90 = just barely lawful and pretty solidly good.

Then whenever an action is off from their alignment, or when a series of actions is tending away from their alignment, let the player know that because of those actions their alignment has shifted, say, 5 points towards Evil, so now your Cleric is 75/85. Maybe write into your games the alignment consequences of various decisions, or work up a standard table of what actions fit into what alignments so your players know what will get them into trouble (assuming they're trying to stay in their original alignment.)

Also, I've said this in a couple threads already, but for each of the two axes of alignment there should be another modifier, which I'm calling Passionate to Indifferent.

A Passionate Neutral character is like the druids in old DnD, they believe in Neutrality passionately and fight to maintain balance in the world. Their actions may sometimes be good/evil/lawful/chaotic, but only to counter an opposite force in the world, and all the while they continue to preach on the value of balance/Neutrality.

An Indifferent Neutral character couldn't care less, but on average their good deeds balance their evil, their chaotic balance their lawful, so that when averaging out their actions they land in Neutral territory.

Likewise, a Passionate lawful will never break his honor, even if it means death. Using my number system, a passionate 90 lawful is just as passionate as a passionate 100 lawful, except in the case of the 90 their personal code doesn't cover everything, while for the 100 their code does in fact cover every aspect of life. Furthermore, the passionate belief in law may lead them to become enforcers of the law, trying to force their beliefs on others. Indifferent lawful will not case what other people do, their lawful code is just for themselves, and as such, only they know when they break it, and unless they're 100 lawful, they will break their own code on occasion, just not very often, and maybe not even to save their lives if they feel like making a point.