Alignment, the War Stirring Beast that needs to be sealed.


Pathfinder First Edition General Discussion

251 to 288 of 288 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>

Rynjin wrote:
SAMAS wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
SAMAS wrote:


but that brings me back to my original point: If you are more concerned with Balance than with Good as a reason to fight Evil, why are you worshipping Iomedae, a Goddess who clearly wishes to tip the scales the other way?
Likely because you believe the scales are tipped in evil's direction as-is and none of the gods within one step of your alignment are aggressive about it.
That's why you ally with Iomedae(and her followers). Why you work with them on their mission. That kind of thing does not require worship. Trying to worship a deity that you only agree with on one relatively minor thing (actively fight evil) and strongly disagree with on everything else is just stupid.

"Relatively minor thing"...that's basically her whole personality.

Iomedae is not a complex goddess.

And who says he "strongly disagrees" with "everything else"? Certainly not me. Stop putting words in my mouth.

You put that word in your own mouth:

Quote:

...but the forces of Evil tend to make a mess of things and throw off the balance for everyone...

...TN character who wanted to make a difference in maintaining the balance by wiping out evil...

...believe the scales are tipped in evil's direction...

Quote:
"Not lockstep with all of her tenets" =/= "Strongly disagrees with all but one thing".

Except for the whole BALANCE BETWEEN GOOD AND EVIL thing.

If you would worship Iomedae just to fight demons to turn the balance of Good and Evil tipping from Evil, what happens when the balance tips towards Good? Start worshipping Rovagug?

Because that is what Iomedae wants. She does not want Balance between Good and Evil, or Law and Chaos. She wants the scales tipped towards Law and Good. If you want balance between Good/Evil and Law/Chaos, Iomedae is not the Goddess for you. She is a Goddess of Purity, not Balance. Sooner rather than later, you're gonna start reading and hearing tenets that chafe your sensibilities.

Quote:
People IRL do it all the time. I'm sure no reasonable person is saying that it's "just stupid" a lot of Christians don't feel bad about eating shellfish and having sex in other positions than missionary.

Yes, but we're talking about a Fantasy Goddess who doesn't sweat small details like that, and when someone screws up the big stuff (like a number of scandals I won't name here), usually revoke your powers and have an Archon/Angel/Azata/Agathion show up and say "CUT THAT MESS OUT!!"

Golarion isn't Earth where God (for the sake of argument) has been mostly non-interventionalist for the past 2000 years. It's closer to Discworld, where guys arguing that the Gods don't exist get fried by lighting bolts with signs reading "YES WE DO" wrapped around them.

Quote:
You don't have to 100% agree with everything in your religion to follow that religion. Not even to be a priest of said religion.

Yes, but if your rate of agreement is only 20%, you're better off finding another religion. You don't think there are followers of Cayden Cailiean, Desna, Inori, or Abadar fighting in Mendev and the Worldwound? Or you know, just being Adventurers?


Deadmanwalking wrote:

I'll repeat once again how useful Alignment is for people using published adventures, NPCs, or monsters.

It's got some potential advantages and disadvantages for PCs, but it's such a useful shorthand when describing NPC morality and behavior that I think it's very much worth keeping.

I think it's useful for PCs, as well:

  • Newbs often require and appreciate the structure and guidance alignment provides
  • Fans of particular classes, like paladins, like and prefer that not every character can do as they like and still access certain power sets
  • Serves as a good baseline to track a character's evolution if so desired

Honestly, though ... if a PC doesn't have powers dependent on alignment, a much looser system is entirely acceptable. Your barbarian is not gonna register as evil for occasionally starting a brawl and kicking someone's ass in a bar ... but when you start spitting babies on your spear, well ...

Keeping track of every little change is tiresome if you don't want to do it, and broad strokes are often just fine.


Jaelithe wrote:
I think it's been shown here that alignment in the hands of capable DM and intelligent players can be an invaluable tool, and a tremendous liability when employed as a bludgeon by the short-sighted and close-minded.

Pretty much. I think the only real question is whether its potential for good outweighs its potential for misuse, which is probably going to be a matter of opinion and personal experience. Personally, I've found more times when alignment felt like a problem or was used badly than I have times when the alignment system added something uniquely valuable. Other people's experience may vary.


That's one example of potentially infinite ones. At least try to argue my main point rather than one specific example of the three I provided and the huge amount of possible ones.

Hell, I even provided an alternate TN one at the end of the LE example.

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
while CDGing the evil emperor in a real game would be highly unlikely to happen, that is what the week of scouting and espionage disguised as a guard beforehand is for, to learn the guard shifts and the contingencies, so you can bypass them and eliminate the risk, but that requires a group which actually takes stealth, bluff and disguise, which seems quite rare according to these boards.

If I was running your setup, what your stealth and bluff will do is make the job possible, not eliminate the risk. Because your bard will find out that in my game, the guard's shifts will overlap, so that the Emperor is never without protection. What you'll find that if you make it as far as to his bedroom, that the Emperor will have contingencies placed by his royal wizard which will animate guardians as soon as life force that's not designated as safe enters the screened and teleport proof room, and that the Emperor will have a spell contignency placed on him that summmons his arms and armor and wakes him to battle. (which is why many a would-be assassin not only failed in his mission, but never survived to report the details.)

In my games, stealth, bluff, and diplomacy, and intelligence will be what makes assassinating the Emperor, POSSIBLE, not eliminate the risks of making the attempt.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber

Meh. Nevermind.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Most of the problems with alignment can be attributed to s+&!ty people or lack of imagination. Often both.

Liberty's Edge

Jaelithe wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:

I'll repeat once again how useful Alignment is for people using published adventures, NPCs, or monsters.

It's got some potential advantages and disadvantages for PCs, but it's such a useful shorthand when describing NPC morality and behavior that I think it's very much worth keeping.

I think it's useful for PCs, as well:

  • Newbs often require and appreciate the structure and guidance alignment provides
  • Fans of particular classes, like paladins, like and prefer that not every character can do as they like and still access certain power sets
  • Serves as a good baseline to track a character's evolution if so desired

Honestly, though ... if a PC doesn't have powers dependent on alignment, a much looser system is entirely acceptable. Your barbarian is not gonna register as evil for occasionally starting a brawl and kicking someone's ass in a bar ... but when you start spitting babies on your spear, well ...

Keeping track of every little change is tiresome if you don't want to do it, and broad strokes are often just fine.

I agree with those advantages...but there clearly are some disadvantages as well. My point is that even if you think it's unnecessary for PCs...it's still a handy thing to have around.


Deadmanwalking wrote:
Jaelithe wrote:
Deadmanwalking wrote:

I'll repeat once again how useful Alignment is for people using published adventures, NPCs, or monsters.

It's got some potential advantages and disadvantages for PCs, but it's such a useful shorthand when describing NPC morality and behavior that I think it's very much worth keeping.

I think it's useful for PCs, as well:

  • Newbs often require and appreciate the structure and guidance alignment provides
  • Fans of particular classes, like paladins, like and prefer that not every character can do as they like and still access certain power sets
  • Serves as a good baseline to track a character's evolution if so desired

Honestly, though ... if a PC doesn't have powers dependent on alignment, a much looser system is entirely acceptable. Your barbarian is not gonna register as evil for occasionally starting a brawl and kicking someone's ass in a bar ... but when you start spitting babies on your spear, well ...

Keeping track of every little change is tiresome if you don't want to do it, and broad strokes are often just fine.

I agree with those advantages...but there clearly are some disadvantages as well. My point is that even if you think it's unnecessary for PCs...it's still a handy thing to have around.

I wasn't trying to challenge you on that. I agree entirely.

I just think it's pretty self-evident that, assuming intelligent players and DMs, the advantages outweigh the disadvantages.


At the end of the day, maybe a paladin (or something with a code in that manner) isn't what you are looking for. There are choices -- and yes, they don't have all the perks, but they don't have the problems you are running across either -- that might work out better for your needs.


i admit a lot of my older characters were creepy and morally questionable. i am working on Tweaking Atsuko's background to remove the imperial servitude in later incarnations and reducing Umbriere's Frailty in future incarnations. i need time to make my characters less creepy. but it takes time to develop the change, and i started in the last 2 campaigns by playing Doctor Ivan Redwood, an Adult Male Doctor and Scientist, and Playing Ventus, a Sylph Squire with Rage issues whom is neither excessively fragile nor a slave, but a Tales of Graces Style knight academy cadet whom channeled her rage through her twin knives, and was bullied because her rage created thunderstorms, and because bullies wanted to get her in trouble, so she became a squire to vent her frustration into something constructive, after being invited by a dwarven knight instructor named Hans known for similar rage issues. Ventus may have been young for a sylph, but that was because she was a squire, not a fully fledged knight, and to build attachment to Hans, and she has neither a 5 con nor a life of slavery, 12 Con before items, sure. Slayer levels, definitely.


Same here, but I don't feel bad about any of them. All characters in stories, and quite different, with some being monsters.

Creepy can be fun, and you can be creepy and remain within any of the normal alignments.

Webstore Gninja Minion

2 people marked this as a favorite.

Removed some unhelpful posts. Be civil to each other, thank you.


Their alignment made them do it Liz.

Webstore Gninja Minion

5 people marked this as a favorite.
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Their alignment made them do it Liz.

...I have a hammer of atonement, along with a cudgel of alignment adjustment. :D


Isn't that attitude adjustment, Liz? ;)

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder PF Special Edition, Starfinder Roleplaying Game Subscriber
Liz Courts wrote:
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Their alignment made them do it Liz.
...I have a hammer of atonement, along with a cudgel of alignment adjustment. :D

So you're St. Elizabeth of the Cudgel? Someone was asking about a Golarion analogue of Greyhawk's most famous saint in another thread.

Might I inquire about your domains? And perhaps maybe dish us some details of your Test of the Starstone?

Silver Crusade

1 person marked this as a favorite.

On the one hand, I appreciate alignment for the shorthand and cosmological ideas to play with.

On the other hand, I truly detest when it's interpreted as prescriptive rather than descriptive and when it gets used to justify the Always Chaotic Evil trope leading to allegedly "good" people engaging in genocide.

That and the "Lawful Good = Best Good" misconception.


Mmmm mmm, yep I agree!

However on the small scale, I have no problem with good murdering the sh** out of evil and making the world a better place. Removing evil is good, and preventing them from doing dastardly (or truly sick) acts at a later stage is also good.

After all, if you kill every evil brigand in the area, rape, murder and robbery will go down. Now people can get on with their lives and only worry about random monsters.


The thing is, Alignments are a guideline, a general direction. No Two people are the same, even with the same alignments.

I mean, look at Seoni, Sajan, and Alain; all Lawful Neutral, but rather different morals.


SAMAS wrote:

The thing is, Alignments are a guideline, a general direction. No Two people are the same, even with the same alignments.

I mean, look at Seoni, Sajan, and Alain; all Lawful Neutral, but rather different morals.

Nope. I'm afraid we've been told that being a particular alignment limits you to only a couple of set personalities and beliefs. Two, MAYBE four at most. But definitely not any significant number.


Mikaze wrote:

On the one hand, I appreciate alignment for the shorthand and cosmological ideas to play with.

On the other hand, I truly detest when it's interpreted as prescriptive rather than descriptive and when it gets used to justify the Always Chaotic Evil trope leading to allegedly "good" people engaging in genocide.

That and the "Lawful Good = Best Good" misconception.

That's '"the Lawful Good = Best Good" in my opinion "misconception."'

After all, I imagine those who are lawful good don't consider it a misconception.


As those people are imaginary, I think we can safely disregard their opinion.


Pathfinder Rulebook Subscriber
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
i admit a lot of my older characters were creepy and morally questionable. i am working on Tweaking Atsuko's background to remove the imperial servitude in later incarnations and reducing Umbriere's Frailty in future incarnations. i need time to make my characters less creepy. but it takes time to develop the change, and i started in the last 2 campaigns by playing Doctor Ivan Redwood, an Adult Male Doctor and Scientist, and Playing Ventus, a Sylph Squire with Rage issues whom is neither excessively fragile nor a slave, but a Tales of Graces Style knight academy cadet whom channeled her rage through her twin knives, and was bullied because her rage created thunderstorms, and because bullies wanted to get her in trouble, so she became a squire to vent her frustration into something constructive, after being invited by a dwarven knight instructor named Hans known for similar rage issues. Ventus may have been young for a sylph, but that was because she was a squire, not a fully fledged knight, and to build attachment to Hans, and she has neither a 5 con nor a life of slavery, 12 Con before items, sure. Slayer levels, definitely.

That's good to hear, and I shouldn't have brought it up. I deleted it because it was too personal, and a low blow. I apologize.


Kryzbyn wrote:
Umbriere Moonwhisper wrote:
i admit a lot of my older characters were creepy and morally questionable. i am working on Tweaking Atsuko's background to remove the imperial servitude in later incarnations and reducing Umbriere's Frailty in future incarnations. i need time to make my characters less creepy. but it takes time to develop the change, and i started in the last 2 campaigns by playing Doctor Ivan Redwood, an Adult Male Doctor and Scientist, and Playing Ventus, a Sylph Squire with Rage issues whom is neither excessively fragile nor a slave, but a Tales of Graces Style knight academy cadet whom channeled her rage through her twin knives, and was bullied because her rage created thunderstorms, and because bullies wanted to get her in trouble, so she became a squire to vent her frustration into something constructive, after being invited by a dwarven knight instructor named Hans known for similar rage issues. Ventus may have been young for a sylph, but that was because she was a squire, not a fully fledged knight, and to build attachment to Hans, and she has neither a 5 con nor a life of slavery, 12 Con before items, sure. Slayer levels, definitely.
That's good to hear, and I shouldn't have brought it up. I deleted it because it was too personal, and a low blow. I apologize.

thank you, apology accepted, please be careful about bringing up such a low blow again. just because i am a fan of the lolita fashion subculture and the cute anime girls that utilize it, because they are cute, doesn't make me a certain word i would rather not say. i did use a lot of dark and creepy backstories, but i am trying to reduce the creepiness. i may include bullying or abuse in a character's backstory, just not the stuff that Kira Moonsong, Kurogetsu Yamiko and Atsuko Aniri went through because i am doing my best to change that for hopefully the better.

my current Umbriere clone in the current Savage worlds campaign on saturdays is youthful and anemic, but the technology level of the setting is so advanced that she is fighting with a plasma pistol and light tactical power armor with a hologram projector and energy shield, not a melee build, still stealthy and persuasive to a point, but more classic rogue with a title and less creepy bard. her mother is still a fey alchemist and her rich uncle was genderswapped to a rich aunt due to fey matriarchy. but she is nowhere near as helpless in combat and her sickliness served as a reason for encouraging her to focus on wearing power armor and using a plasma pistol instead of adopting normal fey magic, because she didn't have the health for neither arcane magic nor the health for physical combat. power armor carries it's own weight and plasma ammo is weightless.


Rynjin wrote:
As those people are imaginary, I think we can safely disregard their opinion.

Well, we're all masters here of disregarding others' opinions, so ...

Grand Lodge

Pathfinder Adventure, Rulebook Subscriber
Jaelithe wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
As those people are imaginary, I think we can safely disregard their opinion.
Well, we're all masters here of disregarding others' opinions, so ...

Prisoners of our own device too.


TriOmegaZero wrote:
Jaelithe wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
As those people are imaginary, I think we can safely disregard their opinion.
Well, we're all masters here of disregarding others' opinions, so ...
Prisoners of our own device too.

so true. i was tired of that Alias, Umbriere was a freeform character i first played in 1997 that took till 2010 to really change and changed again in 2014 and the transition should be stable in 2015. i probably won't play Yamiko Kurogetsu or Kira Moonsong anymore, because they represent my working around strictness of groups i experienced in 2006-2013 and Nekogami Shuriken and her family, i abandoned in 2010 or so. the Aniri family i keep because they were when i started freeform RP, and though i identify with the Sunset Twins, Lumiere and Umbriere, to varying degrees over time and used them as defaults when i ran low on concepts. i would love to try mother Ilina, Great aunt Conflitta or any of the other 13 siblings. though i have a special fondness for Rin and Atsuko, Atsuko because she was the most recent of the 9 sisters derived in 2009 or so, 2 months after Ragna and Aigis, when her original story arc involved her liberation

and Rin, because the timid and shy street magician whom was good with a knife, was a fun archetype to enjoy

so yeah, i am a prisoner of my own device. i might consider trying Pyrus, Aquina, or Terrucia eventually, though the big issue with Terrucia, is she is way outside of my comfort zone, lawful neutral, unyielding like yggdrasil, way too masculine and though i played a similar character to her in the form of Kyra Steelskin, whom was raised by orcs as if she were a man, Terrucia Aniri takes Kyra Steelskin and cranks her up further. tall busty fey oread woman whom is more tree than stone, and well, would require a lot of reskinning, because she is effectively a druidic flavored psionic warrior whom fights with a gardening hoe, thrown carpenters nails, a blacksmiths hammer and a mining pick and has profession (farmer) profession (miner) and profession (carpenter). Aquina would be too obnoxious and boisterous, and Pyrus wouldn't be a good asset to the party's wealth because she melts lots of things by sheer bodyheat.


Jaelithe wrote:
Mikaze wrote:

On the one hand, I appreciate alignment for the shorthand and cosmological ideas to play with.

On the other hand, I truly detest when it's interpreted as prescriptive rather than descriptive and when it gets used to justify the Always Chaotic Evil trope leading to allegedly "good" people engaging in genocide.

That and the "Lawful Good = Best Good" misconception.

That's '"the Lawful Good = Best Good" in my opinion "misconception."'

After all, I imagine those who are lawful good don't consider it a misconception.

Lawful goods can't question their own belief systems and find faults? No matter their wisdom, or what they know?

I never saw that marked down, "you are LG so you can't think on the negatives of LG, or where it fails".

LG is the no critical thought alignment? Fascinating.


3 people marked this as a favorite.
DM Under The Bridge wrote:
Jaelithe wrote:
Mikaze wrote:

On the one hand, I appreciate alignment for the shorthand and cosmological ideas to play with.

On the other hand, I truly detest when it's interpreted as prescriptive rather than descriptive and when it gets used to justify the Always Chaotic Evil trope leading to allegedly "good" people engaging in genocide.

That and the "Lawful Good = Best Good" misconception.

That's '"the Lawful Good = Best Good" in my opinion "misconception."'

After all, I imagine those who are lawful good don't consider it a misconception.

Lawful goods can't question their own belief systems and find faults? No matter their wisdom, or what they know?

I never saw that marked down, "you are LG so you can't think on the negatives of LG, or where it fails".

LG is the no critical thought alignment? Fascinating.

Reread my post, and hopefully you'll realize how absurd your response is.


You are taking this way too seriously. Chill buddy.


Consider me on ice, Scooter.


Rynjin wrote:

That's one example of potentially infinite ones. At least try to argue my main point rather than one specific example of the three I provided and the huge amount of possible ones.

Hell, I even provided an alternate TN one at the end of the LE example.

Because while the specifics change, It remains the same song. All your examples are reasons for Alliance, for working together towards common goals. They are not reasons to become a Cleric.

When a person becomes a Cleric or Paladin, they are choosing to devote themselves to that deity's goals and principles. Yes, there is a fair amount of leeway in how well your morals line up, that is what the One Step rule represents. If your morals diverge more than that, why are you even worshipping that goddess?


1 person marked this as a favorite.
born_of_fire wrote:
Rynjin wrote:
If it is indeed meant to "inform, not restrict" as EVERYONE who's defended alignment so far has said, then it SHOULDN'T RESTRICT.

The paladin is proof that alignment is intended to restrict. Additonally, the fact that the paladin is a mechanically superior option to similar martial classes without alignment restrictions indicates that the alignment restriction is intended for balance so I'm not sure how you come to the conclusion that EVERYONE believes alignment should "inform, not restrict"; the devs obviously don't.

I'm also not sure why another person's abiding dislike of the alignment system requires the rules of the entire game be changed. Encumbrance is often disregarded at many tables and my group did not use it for years. I don't recall any threads talking about how awful encumbrance is and how badly it needs to be removed from the game though. If you don't like alignment, don't use alignment but there's no reason to take it from the rest of us who either have no problem with or actually appreciate its inclusion.

yup, according to this thread the only martial who comes anywhere near competing has to be lawful stupid or it's badwrongfun...great. nice. When the penalty for playing a non-LG fanatic martial is 'are utterly worthless and a drain on party resources' the issue is more than alignment.

Adn when the idea that it is somehow a good act to obliterate entire races, but an evil act to question if that is a good idea bends my mind.

Liberty's Edge

Rob Godfrey wrote:
yup, according to this thread the only martial who comes anywhere near competing has to be lawful stupid or it's badwrongfun...great. nice. When the penalty for playing a non-LG fanatic martial is 'are utterly worthless and a drain on party resources' the issue is more than alignment.

Side note: Superstition + Beast Totem Barbarians and properly built Rangers also compete quite well. Just for the record.

Rob Godfrey wrote:
Adn when the idea that it is somehow a good act to obliterate entire races, but an evil act to question if that is a good idea bends my mind.

Mine too, but that's more the people who are saying that's issue than that of the Alignment system.


Paladins are restricted by alignment, not endemic of alignment itself.

1 to 50 of 288 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / General Discussion / Alignment, the War Stirring Beast that needs to be sealed. All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.