| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I never appreciated the many failings of the established alignment system. Lawful Good? You're a religious zealot. Chaotic Evil? You're a mad-man (psychotic villain) and shouldn't be allowed to play that alignment. Evil? You're still the villain, and there's no Evil PCs in my campaign (as a GM).
So, I began my quest to redefine the 'alignment' system. And I think I've come up with a fair compromise. Gone, are the notions of "good" and "evil", at least, for the most part. I came up with this system after reading an article, which I'll link below, and would like to get your thoughts on it (my proposed system).
http://thatboomerkid.tumblr.com/post/99181385456/in-defense-of-the-nine-poi nt-alignment-system
Why do I prefer this new method? Because it facilitates roleplaying, more so than the current system does. Alignment isn't something you just get up one morning and decide to do. It's an integral part of the characters psyche that was molded throughout their childhood and teenage years.
So, without further ado! I present to you, the MTG Alignment System!
== Red (chaotic)
"If you disagree, that's your problem, not mine!"
- Chaos
- Personal Freedoms
== Blue (open-minded)
"I prefer to remain open minded"
- Listens to all votes, views and voices
- Doesn't 'hate' on other religions, etc.
- Keeps things fair for all parties involved
- Values all forms of life (regardless of other's alignments)
== Black (selfish)
"I'm right, you're wrong, I'm big, you're small! Now sit down, and shut the hell up!"
- Accomplishes goals, regardless of sacrifices
- A means to an end
- Superiority (complex?)
- Greed (possibly)
== White (lawful)
"I refuse to compromise my personal beliefs" (whether they be religious, political or personal)
- Loyalty
- Honesty
- Patriotism
- Order and Structure
- Keeps oaths and promises
== Green (neutral)
"Uh... Erm... I don't like confrontation!"
- Usually defaults to secondary color
- Thinks through difficult decisions
- Considers Pros and Cons of all outcomes
- Common sense, above all
===== Possible Alignment Combinations
Black + Black = "I'm a selfish bastard, and proud of it!"
Black + White = "I'll accomplish my goals no matter what, though, I'll do it from within the system."
White + Black = "I abuse the laws and regulations to my advantage. I think it's time we had a raise in taxes!"
Black + Blue = "I may just be looking out for 'number one', but, even I am not without a moral compass."
Blue + Black = "I'm open to suggestions, as long as I get a fair cut of the profits, if not more-so."
Black + Red = "I'll accomplish my goals, my own way! Without regards to good or evil."
Red + Black = "I don't care for your laws or religious ideals! I will accomplish my goals, no matter what it takes!"
Black + Green = "I do what needs to be done, but only in regards to my own survival."
Green + Black = "I'll try to be fair when I can. But if it comes down to it, I need to accomplish my goals, no matter the cost..."
White + White = "We must follow the laws of the land's government and religion to a T!" - ((not recommended, you have been warned!))
White + Blue = "We like to follow a set of rules and laws here, but your ignorance of them can be forgiven, and we'll try to help you get acclimated."
Blue + White = "I respect all governments and religions, though, I won't be swayed from my own beliefs as easily."
White + Red = "Law? I *am* the Law!"
Red + White = "Personal freedom should be attained through debate and politicking. I'll fight injustice wherever I see it, but wont go out of my way to break the law."
White + Green = "We have rules and regulations, which everybody must adhere too. If not, perhaps we can come to a compromise?"
Green + White = "Let's keep things civil and in accordance with the laws. Lest we find ourselves clapped in irons!"
Blue + Blue = "I'm open-minded about everything. I can respect and appreciate all world views."
Blue + Red = "I respect your laws/religion, as long as you remember that not everybody has to worship your deity, or adhere to your moral compass."
Red + Blue = "Keep your rules and religion to yourself, I don't want to hear it. We'd just end up arguing anyway!"
Blue + Green = "I try to ensure that everybodies voice is heard, and calculate all the Pros and Cons before making a decision."
Green + Blue = "I enjoy being the voice of reason."
Red + Red = "I do whatever I want, whenever I want, because I want too. I don't have time for your moral/philosophical musings!" (can be very brash, or even psychotic)
Red + Green = "My hotheadedness can sometimes get me into trouble. Though, I'm not incapable of learning from my mistakes, after I've had time to think things through."
Green + Red = "I prefer to think things through, weighing my options. Though, I usually go with whatever grants me the most personal freedom."
Green + Green = "Let's try to keep things fair and as civil as possible. Confrontation isn't good for the group, if we plan on working together for a long time!"
That's not too different from how I see alignments.
I've drawn a lot from MTG, but I use the regular alignments.
For me, Good means something closer to what White means in MTG: you care about the community. You could be a selfless leader, or a fascist dictator. Evil is closer to Black - it's not that you enjoy the suffering of others, it's that you care for no. 1 first and foremost.
Lawful steps on White and Blue - Lawful means that you consider that your goals are achieved by establishing order. Chaotic is closer to Red, believing that your goals are best achieved by removing institutions and allowing personal freedom to be as limitless as possible.
Neutrality pushes towards the boundaries of Blue and Green - Blue because it cares about the abstract, while Green cares about the mundane.
That being said, your interpretation of blue seems to be wildly different from what it is in MTG.
That's not too different from how I see alignments.
I've drawn a lot from MTG, but I use the regular alignments.
That being said, your interpretation of blue seems to be wildly different from what it is in MTG.
I haven't been playing MTG for very long, about 6 months, so my interpretation may be a little skewed at the moment. But that's why I submitted it, to find "holes" or inconsistencies in it.
The 5-color alignment system just feels a lot less restrictive to me, as though one could possibly 'slide' from one color to another while doing so in a more "naturally organic" way, without the perceived requirement of "stepping" through alignments (lawful-neutral-chaotic, etc) and encourages roleplaying more so than the already establish 9-point system that most tabletop groups adhere too.
Thanks for the reply!!
I generally do without alignment unless I'm playing with new players that need to be reminded they are playing a character, not themselves.
I honestly kinda find the M:tG color system even *more* restrictive than regular ol' DnD chaotic/lawful whatever. At least there, you're operating on a plane of opposed opposites; essentially, altruism/selfishness and orderly/free-spirited.
In M:tG, things are just as restrictive, but with weird things welded together. White is essentially Lawful Good, and Black is essentially Neutral Evil (though I suppose in a very Nietchean "Make the best you can in a rotten world that can't be improved," sort of way), Red is Chaotic, and Blue and Green are, respectively, scholarly and druidic flavors of Neutral. All five unnecessarily blend very specific outlooks together into very specific outcomes. In short, traditional DnD alignments are less restrictive precisely because they are more granular. There are nine alignments to Magic's five colors.
And saying that one can mix them together to produce different combinations that outnumber the DnD alignments doesn't really work for me. The whole point of having an "axis" system is that different people fall into different points on the spectrum. If your players feel that every Lawful Neutral character needs to be Judge Dredd, every Chaotic Evil character needs to be a cackling madman villain-type, well, bluntly, then that's their fault for being unimaginative rather than the alignment system's fault for being restrictive.
Also, you're entirely too kind to blue, the backstabbing rat-bastard color, and I look forward to the day when all four of the other colors join forces to foul every sea, destroy every island, pollute every wellspring of blue mana in the plains before putting all of its adepts to the sword, finally and completely snuffing the color blue from the mana wheel once and for all and cleansing the multiverse of its smug, self-satisfied jerkfacery.
*ahem* Sorry about that.
I honestly kinda find the M:tG color system even *more* restrictive than regular ol' DnD chaotic/lawful whatever. At least there, you're operating on a plane of opposed opposites; essentially, altruism/selfishness and orderly/free-spirited.
In M:tG, things are just as restrictive, but with weird things welded together. White is essentially Lawful Good, and Black is essentially Neutral Evil (though I suppose in a very Nietchean "Make the best you can in a rotten world that can't be improved," sort of way), Red is Chaotic, and Blue and Green are, respectively, scholarly and druidic flavors of Neutral. All five unnecessarily blend very specific outlooks together into very specific outcomes. In short, traditional DnD alignments are less restrictive precisely because they are more granular. There are nine alignments to Magic's five colors.
And saying that one can mix them together to produce different combinations that outnumber the DnD alignments doesn't really work for me. The whole point of having an "axis" system is that different people fall into different points on the spectrum. If your players feel that every Lawful Neutral character needs to be Judge Dredd, every Chaotic Evil character needs to be a cackling madman villain-type, well, bluntly, then that's their fault for being unimaginative rather than the alignment system's fault for being restrictive.
Also, you're entirely too kind to blue, the backstabbing rat-bastard color, and I look forward to the day when all four of the other colors join forces to foul every sea, destroy every island, pollute every wellspring of blue mana in the plains before putting all of its adepts to the sword, finally and completely snuffing the color blue from the mana wheel once and for all and cleansing the multiverse of its smug, self-satisfied jerkfacery.
*ahem* Sorry about that.
Maybe. But we can't forget that we're not playing a set of stats on a sheet of paper (at least, I hope you're not!). We're playing completely organic people that exist in a living, breathing world. And not every person is going to fall into the "9-point" alignment system. It fails, in my opinion, to account for too many dynamics in human behavior/psychology. The "color wheel" method, which I outlined, is just a way of encouraging more roleplaying- coming up with back-stories as to "why my character thinks/acts this way".
And, as I mentioned previously, I've only been playing MTG for a few months now, so my interpretation of all colors may not be entirely accurate. Amends will be made, where they need to be.
White - Good (NG)
Black - Evil (NE)
Green - Neutral (TN)
Blue - Lawful (LN)
Red - Chaotic (CN)?
Perhaps. But restricting each character to 1 color isn't what I originally had in mind, though, I'm sure it would work just fine that way.
The original idea was that the character would have 2 colors to represent their attitudes and personalities. Pretty much a way of allowing players to play organic characters that "feel" more real, in my opinion anyway.
No colour is wholly good. No colour is wholly evil. Even black has good guys. It's really quite different from the 9 point system.
I would say take a look at the guilds of Ravnica for examples of societies exemplifying each combination of colours.
My point is, of ''course'' they're all living breathing people. But the color system is ''more'' restrictive in that sense, because each of the five colors glues together concepts in a way the alignment wheel doesn't.
For instance, a lawful neutral character might be, say, an everyday hardscrabble peasant who just likes peace, quiet, and order more than his neighbors. He might be a stuffy guy who strictly obeys the code of conduct required to be a "gentleman," but does it out of deference to the code itself rather than because he believes that it's a part of being a good person. He might be a member of a desert cannibal tribe who respects traditions of hospitality even when he hates the person claiming it. He may be, if you are very unimaginative, Judge Dredd with a code of medieval paint. This is because the alignments of Dungeons and Dragons are fluid and shifting, best represented on a Euclidean plane rather than a nine-by-nine grid. In Dungeons and Dragons, your alignment is the beginning of your character, not the end of it.
Colors in Magic: the Gathering, by contrast, are ultra limiting. Are you green? You now care about nature, no matter what. Are you white? You are now controlling and obsessed with the greater good. Are you blue? You are a weasely sewer-fink of a person who cares more about being right than actually doing anything helpful. They tie together more aspects of characterization into themselves than regular ol' alignment ever could, or ever intended to.
All of these aspects are almost completely inextricable from the colors they represent. Mixing two of them together helps, if only because it forces one to cherry-pick which bits of any two colors are more important than the other bits, but it still hurts from the incredibly limiting nature of the original colors.
Alignment in the Dungeons and Dragons axis-system is one aspect of your character. It is very simple and very granular, and it is completely possible to be "between" alignments. I could be "Chaotic Good leaning towards Neutral" or "Neutral Evil with some Lawful tendencies." It allows for lots of shades of characterization, and is a jumping off point rather than an end. Heck, one of the important parts of alignment is what is important enough to cause a character to act against his or her natural inclinations!
Conversely, the color alignments are a constricting straightjacket that dictates huge chunks of who and what your character is and what they believe. They offer almost none of the "shading" that is such an important part of the Dungeons and Dragons system: how can one be "leaning" or "inclined" towards one or the other alignment when there are five points spilling into each other like paint?
If you prefer it, I can understand that. But I don't honestly see how a much more-restrictive system can make you happier than a looser one if your problem is one of "realism" and making "realistic characters."
Looks fine, except for Green.
Green is definitely confrontational, the Fight mechanic is in color for it. Green takes the direct approach, the least subtle of all the colors. If there's a problem, smash through it.
The big misconception is that the colors are alignments. They are not, colors are motivation, methodology, and outlook. Green's outlook of the world comes from natural order, Green sees survival of the fittest and realizes that if he is to survive he must become strong. This can range from a LG monk perfecting his body to the chaotic evil Demon who uses his strength to ensure that nobody else rises to challenge him.
That being said, getting rid of alignment and using the color wheel to define motivation is a perfectly acceptable option.
Some things that I'm personally working on is having primary and secondary colors. Typically primary colors define motivation and outlook, while secondary colors are more linked to methodology.
A While-Black character is looking out for the group, but is not against stepping on others to ensure that him and his group are taken care of. (Think Mafia)
I would still impose some class restrictions:
Paladins must have white (secondary or primary)
Barbarians cannot be primarily blue
Anti-Paladins cannot have white
Colors in Magic: the Gathering, by contrast, are ultra limiting. Are you green? You now care about nature, no matter what. Are you white? You are now controlling and obsessed with the greater good. Are you blue? You are a weasely sewer-fink of a person who cares more about being right than actually doing anything helpful. They tie together more aspects of characterization into themselves than regular ol' alignment ever could, or ever intended to.
I don't think that this is the way that colors are intended to be represented. Look at Koth, he is a pure red Planeswalker, he is rash, gruff and rarely does anything involving fire. He also has a strong sense of honor and a tendency for self sacrifice. Just because someone is pure red doesn't make that person the embodiment of red.
I just don't see this "encouraging roleplay" any more than the 9 alignments. If people aren't gonna get into character, this will not help them do it. This doesn't inspire a backstory or motivations anymore than the two axises we have now. "Green-White" is just as meaningless as saying someone is "Chaotic Neutral", except the average person actually has a decent idea or can guess what Good, Lawful, Chaotic and Evil mean.
I don't see it encouraging roleplay, nor do I see nine-point encouraging roleplay. I suppose I'll concede that the average person won't know what the color wheel is, but it's honestly a lot less complicated that pretty much every other part of the rules to this game, but I don't see the problem there.
I disagree about backstory and motivations, there have been many times when I've thought, "what would a [color combination] character be like?"
It honestly can help mold interesting characters or organizations. it can also lead to interesting roleplay situations. I find the idea of a blue and green individuals butting heads over the pros and cons of instinct vs study a little more interesting than the same old good vs evil over and over again.
Got halfway through another post, but I realized I'm not doing anyone any good. You clearly honestly prefer Magic's color system to DnD's axis system.
I will never understand that. I will never agree with that. I will never believe that forcing your players to pick, not merely their alignments, but their whole personalities from one of five "package deal" categories is less restrictive than asking them to come up with a broad outline of the sort of person their characters try to be and then letting them sketch in the details for themselves, piecemeal.
But, you clearly do. And you don't seem like a bad person, nor does disagreeing with me make you one. So... go nuts. At the very least, though, you'll need to work with some of the spells to remove all the alignment stuff. Hmmm... I guess that "Detect/Smite Black/White" isn't that different from a paladin/antipaladin's usual abilities, respectively. And subbing in "White" for lawful at every stage will basically solve any issues that alignment-locked classes have, unless I'm forgetting one.
Damage Reduction might be a little trickier. Maybe replace the various "alignment aura" enchantments with one. Chromatic: Insert Color Here?
Heh. Be kinda cool if all the chromatic dragons suddenly change personalities to align with "evil" versions of their various chromatic alignments.
Hmmm... Well, the cosmology of the planes would be pretty f@#$ed, but I guess you're probably homebrewing the cosmology of the multiverse extensively if you're swapping out the alignments. Maybe every two- or three-color mixture has its own afterlife and outsiders? Nah, that'd get unworkable in a hurry. Be easier to just assign color alignments to each of the existing factions and have them occupy particular segments of the afterlife planes, some for evil people and some for good.
Of course, there's the fact that blue doesn't get a good afterlife, but that's a problem for another time.
Guess I ended up enjoying this thought experiment more than I expected. Good luck, and let us know how it goes.
Got halfway through another post, but I realized I'm not doing anyone any good. You clearly honestly prefer Magic's color system to DnD's axis system.
I will never understand that. I will never agree with that. I will never believe that forcing your players to pick, not merely their alignments, but their whole personalities from one of five "package deal" categories is less restrictive than asking them to come up with a broad outline of the sort of person their characters try to be and then letting them sketch in the details for themselves, piecemeal.
But, you clearly do. And you don't seem like a bad person, nor does disagreeing with me make you one. So... go nuts.
At the very least, though, you'll need to work with some of the spells to remove all the alignment stuff. Hmmm... I guess that "Detect/Smite Black/White" isn't that different from a paladin/antipaladin's usual abilities, respectively. And subbing in "White" for lawful at every stage will basically solve any issues that alignment-locked classes have, unless I'm forgetting one.
Damage Reduction might be a little trickier. Maybe replace the various "alignment aura" enchantments with one. Chromatic: Insert Color Here?
Heh. Be kinda cool if all the chromatic dragons suddenly change personalities to align with "evil" versions of their various chromatic alignments.
Hmmm... Well, the cosmology of the planes would be pretty f@#$ed, but I guess you're probably homebrewing the cosmology of the multiverse extensively if you're swapping out the alignments. Maybe every two- or three-color mixture has its own afterlife and outsiders? Nah, that'd get unworkable in a hurry. Be easier to just assign color alignments to each of the existing factions and have them occupy particular segments of the afterlife planes, some for evil people and some for good.
Of course, there's the fact that blue doesn't get a good afterlife, since being a good person is utterly incompatible with being smug a*+#+~& whose only goal in life is ruining everyone else's fun and making them all thoroughly miserable so you can feel cool about how much smarter you are than them, but that's a problem for another time.
Guess I ended up enjoying this thought experiment more than I expected. Good luck, and let us know how it goes.
I will read this tomorrow!
|
alignment is one big waxball of philosophy. two poles, five colors, no different. the subjective component is huge.
that said, how about this: keep (or change?) your flavors. then assign them to two (or more?) positions.
(example)
position one: how do you handle conflict?
position two: what is your role in a group dynamic?
this way Green-Black is different than Black-Green, etc.
just an idea. someone will likely interject with a monologue about personal freedoms. comes with the territory. cheers!
I don't play Magic: The Gathering. I know very, very little about it. Lore-wise, this thread has taught me all I know. I know a little about the mechanics behind the game, but I never knew or realized that the colors of the mana have differing philosophies. Your thread has gotten me thinking about alignment and all that fun stuff. In the last game I ran, several of my players were evil. But they didn't necessarily act like evil characters, until one of them decided to blow up a silk merchant. Couple things:
Colors in Magic: the Gathering, by contrast, are ultra limiting. Are you green? You now care about nature, no matter what. Are you white? You are now controlling and obsessed with the greater good. Are you blue? You are a weasely sewer-fink of a person who cares more about being right than actually doing anything helpful. They tie together more aspects of characterization into themselves than regular ol' alignment ever could, or ever intended to.
...
This made me assign classes to colors. White is the Paladin, Green the Druid. Blue was a bit tricky, but a first level Wizard fits this bill (know-it-all useless guy). Red is a Barbarian and Black is a Rogue.
Your system for alignment is very interesting. One problem I can see though is how it would alter the cosmology. One way to fix this could be to have each domain associated with a color (and sub-domains use whatever color their associated domain does). The alignment on the god therefore would be a combination of those colors, regardless of how many that would be. After all, gods aren't people and should have a deeper breadth of moral philosophy than your average mortal. Think of the powerful multicolored cards in Magic. I think they are called Legendary creatures.
Incidentally, a follower of the Green Path would probably have Green as his primary color. A Diabolist would probably be White-Black or Black-White (White-Black is definitely Lawful Evil, raising taxes and whatnot).
As for alignment restrictions on classes, such as all Paladins need to be Lawful Good, change this to White. Since "good" and "evil" are no longer defined concepts (there's a contradiction in terms), the secondary color choice is open to whatever you want. However, most Paladins would probably be White-White, by Ulrich's definition of that combination. But I think I would still allow for a different secondary color, chosen from the list of your deity's colors (probably enforce the next most common color as your secondary color).
Clerics are normally within one step of their deity's alignment, but with this system I would require the deity's primary color and whatever other color you want, even if your deity doesn't have it. So say that Calistra has Red/Black/Green (I'm not entirely sure if that is what it would come down to, but I bet it is close), You can be any combination of Red as a Cleric of Calistra.
You could even go further on the magic association bit and further classify the various schools of magic with a color. Necromancy will probably be Black. Therefore, I would suggest to a player who wants to be a Necromancer Wizard that he choose Blue-Black or Black-Blue as his alignment (based on my idea that most Wizards are probably Blue). Of course, this is just a suggestion, as that will probably end up being how he plays his character anyway. Red and Black combinations are also probably pretty common among necromancers.
Furthermore, I like Rainzax's definition of the positions of the colors, and I feel like you had that in mind when writing descriptions of the combinations. Explaining why the primary and secondary color positions matter I feel grounds it more in mechanics, while still keeping the philosophical aspects of it. Conflict and Group Dynamic, very simple but very descriptive.
Finally, I'm a bit conflicted about the Green. I agree with them being Neutral but I think that if they are typically the nature people then they should be more aggressive in conflict, survival of the fittest and all that. If there is one color that I would urge you to take a second look at, Green is that color.
I can't wait to show this to my lieutenant player! Most of my players play Magic so I think this is a concept they could grasp quickly.It would also allow them more freedom when creating characters, since there is no good and evil and I can get behind that.
90% of everything you need to know about the colors:
http://hydra-media.cursecdn.com/mtgsalvation.gamepedia.com/e/e1/Color_Wheel .jpg
I tried something similar a while back.
For the refined version:
Every society, and every person within that society, has a basic philosophy of life and what is important to leading a “good life”. These philosophies change from society to society and person to person, but they nonetheless play an important role in how your character views the world. This is not an alignment system. Whether a particular set of values is seen as ‘good’ or ‘evil’ is always dependent on the values of those around the person.
There are ten values presented here to help in the process of character creation. All the values are considered equally valid within the game. Note that these are not all possible values or philosophies, and how strongly and to what end you have your character pursue them is up to you. It is also important to remember that these values are meant only as a guide to roleplaying a character. If you already have a good idea about how you want to play your character, you can skip this section entirely.
The values are set up with a brief paragraph that describes what is important to someone holding that value and a suggested personality which contains descriptors for how your character might behave. The suggested personality traits can be ignored or expanded on.
How strongly your character believes in a particular value can vary. Some values are so vital to your character that living without them would seem anathema, while others are seen mainly as good ideas but not as life-defining. Because of this, there are three types of values you may have: primary values, secondary values, and tertiary values.
You should start your character with only one value within each category. You may add more, but it’s not a good idea to have more than six values (at that point the character has no strong values).
Primary Values: These are the character’s core values and that character’s basic outlook on life. These could be what the character was raised to value or could be values the character picked up later in life. Violating these values is always a source of extreme discomfort for the character and will cause feelings of remorse, shame, anger, or frustration for a long period of time. A character will seek a way of atoning for violating these values.
Generally a character has only one primary value. It is okay to have two prime values, but such a duality must be of adjacent values as shown on the table below. In no case should a character have more than two prime values.
If you simply cannot choose among the values, place all values you think your character feels strongly about as secondary values. As you play, it should become obvious which value or values your character favors.
Secondary Values: These are values that the character has picked up in addition to the primary value. The character will adhere to them most of the time. Violating secondary values makes the character unhappy but usually not as distressed as violating primary values, particularly if there’s a good reason for the violation. In general, secondary values are no more than one place removed from the primary values.
Generally a character has no more than two secondary values. It is possible to have three (or more) secondary values, but the more your character has, the greater a chance there will be for conflict or the more likely it is the values are really tertiary.
On rare occasions, secondary values conflict with one another. This generally happens if the character was raised with one set of values but has come to believe in opposing or near-opposing values. Though characters will try to avoid violating primary values, such characters will always feel torn between the conflicting values and constantly wonder whether they made the right choice.
Most often, conflicting secondary values result in there being no primary value at all until the character decides to fully embrace or reject one of the conflicting values.
Tertiary Values: These are values that the character thinks are a generally good idea, though the character may not always adhere to them. Violating them makes the character slightly uncomfortable but never particularly remorseful. They are generally no more than two places away from the primary value.
Tertiary values cannot conflict with primary values. They may conflict with secondary values, but a character will never feel torn when choosing a secondary value over a tertiary one.
Changing Values: There should be no penalty for changing values, but players should be encouraged to have such changes in their character occur gradually over the course of game play. Primary values tend to be the most resilient and least likely to change, but any event that causes characters to question their world view will also cause a prime value to be questioned as well. Secondary values are less resilient, generally changing slowly over time barring life-altering events. Tertiary values are the least resilient and most likely to change over time.
You are able to encourage people to see things your way and to allocate resources decisively. Maintaining a strong public image and having strong connections allows you to maintain social power and wealth. You enjoy having prestige and respect among your peers as well as recognition of your position by others.
Suggested personality traits: Authoritative, Persuasive, Regal, Self-Confident.
You enjoy demonstrating your competence and always look out for new opportunities whenever they present themselves. Enhancing your skills and challenging yourself gives you a great deal of satisfaction. You like having your skills acknowledged by others even when you don’t claim credit.
Suggested personality traits: Ambitious, Capable, Enthusiastic, Motivated.
You are able to take care of yourself very well and you like to ensure that you always have enough. Improving your own welfare and gaining more resources gives you a sense of comfort. You prefer to have great personal wealth and power and you are always looking for ways to gain more.
Suggested personality traits: Crafty, Cunning, Resourceful, Shrewd.
You enjoy all the good things that life provides and enjoy partaking in them as much as possible. Gaining new sources of personal satisfaction and gratification always interests you. You prefer to avoid anything that makes you feel unhappy or unsatisfied and actively seek out things that make you feel good.
Suggested personality traits: Epicurean, Indulgent, Passionate, Voluptuous
You are able to think independently and to express yourself in different creative ways. Sharing ideas with others and hearing the ideas others have help you to be innovative. You actively try to think of new ways to do something and tend to encourage those around you to think more creatively.
Suggested personality traits: Curious, Daring, Enterprising, Inquisitive
You enjoy encouraging others to share their own points of views with you and to understand the merits and flaws of differing traditions and cultures. Protecting the welfare of people and nature are important to you, as is advancing social justice for all. You look for ways to help ensure everyone has equal footing.
Suggested personality traits: Accepting, Broad-minded, Communal, Equianimous
You are able to appreciate the diversity of those around you while still looking for ways to promote stability within your community. Being able to preserve your community, while also enhancing the welfare of those within it, is important to you. You like to keep people and places safe.
Suggested personality traits: Amicable, Diligent, Just, Protective
You enjoy having a stable community of family and friends around you who help one another out when times are tough. Helping others and being responsible are important to you, as is having a sense of belonging. You prefer to have good status within your community and are always looking for ways to fit in.
Suggested personality traits: Dependable, Loyal, Observant, Responsible
You are able to restrain actions, inclinations, or impulses likely to upset or harm others. Self-discipline and maintaining societal expectation and norms are important to you. You prefer moderation to excess and dislike displays of wonton excess or indulgences since you feel such excesses often lead to the destruction of society.
Suggested personality traits: Humble, Modest, Obedient, Polite
You enjoy having a stable environment around you. Ensuring the stability of society and your own position within society are important to you. You think that it is important to accept traditional customs and religion since they are the foundations of society. You like to preserve the social order and to take life in moderation.
Suggested personality traits: Courtly, Logical, Orderly, Respectful
The table below lists all the values for quick reference as to which are located next to one another as well as which are opposed. Keep in mind that unless your character was raised with an opposing value (and has kept it as a secondary or tertiary value), your character will see its tenants as flawed at best, morally wrong at worst. Also keep in mind that any value, taken to extremes, will always cause trouble.
Governance<->Success<->Independence<->Indulgence
^-------------------------------------------------------------^
|---------------------------------------------------------------|
v--------------------------------------------------------------v
Tradition-------------------------------------------------Novelty
^-------------------------------------------------------------^
|---------------------------------------------------------------|
v--------------------------------------------------------------v
Restraint<----->Community<----->Security<----->Equity
For fun, I decided to assign colors to different domains and schools of magic. So here they are!
Air - Red: To me, Air means freedom, and red is the embodiment of that.
Animal - Green: This one should be obvious. Green is all about nature.
Artifice - Blue: Blue is all about that technology. So is Artifice.
Chaos - Red: Another obvious one, Red is chaotic.
Charm - Red: Red uses emotions, and so manipulating people's emotions should fall under this color.
Community - White: White is about order and people, I feel that it represents Community well.
Darkness - Black: This one seemed obvious to me.
Death - Black: Black is a pretty obvious color I feel.
Destruction - Black: The three D's are now the three B's!
Earth - Green: Green is a pretty clear one to me too.
Evil - Black: If you don't want good and evil, then ignore this one. But on that color wheel it says black is amoral. Evil is also amoral.
Fire - Red: Fire is the element of Red, so it makes sense that it would be here.
Glory - White: It was the domain abilities that made me decide that Glory should be White.
Good - White: White is moral, Good is moral, White is Good.
Healing - Green: Survival, growth. I felt that Green would be a good color for Healing.
Knowledge - Blue: Blue is the color of intelligence, and Knowledge is intelligence.
Law - White: White is Order. White is Law.
Liberation - Red: Freedom! Red!
Luck - Red: Luck is chaotic.
Madness - Black: On the color wheel it says Black is Paranoia. Which leads to madness. It was a tough call, almost went with Red on this one.
Magic - Blue: Magic is often associated with intelligence, and so is Blue.
Nobility - White: Law and order often go hand-in-hand with nobility.
Plant - Green: Obvious I think.
Protection - White: Goes with order I think.
Repose - Black: Repose is the spiritual side of Death. First I thought White would work, but I like Black for it better. Gives them a "not all black is bad" thing.
Rune - Blue: Blue is, on the whole, easy for me I think. It's all about intelligence. Runes go with that.
Scalykind - Blue: The draconic language and dragons themselves are often associated with magic, and therefore intelligence and Blue.
Strength - Green: At first I thought Red, but then survival of the fittest kicked in and Green made more sense to me.
Sun - White: The Sun is the symbol of White. So.. yeah. That's it.
Travel - Green: Moving about through the wilderness? That's about the only reason I have for Green with Travel.
Trickery - Blue: You have to be smarter than someone to manipulate them. Blue is with Trickery for that reason. Thought about Black for this one too.
Void - Black: Void is the darkness between the stars, and therefor associated with Black.
War - Red: War is chaotic, messy and emotional. So is Red.
Water - Blue: Water is the symbol for Blue.
Weather - Green: I admit this one is partially influenced by Gozreh. And by a "why not?" attitude.
...
There are exactly seven domains for each color. Just kinda happened that way.
Abjuration - White: At first I thought that this should be Green, because of Envy (Sin magic!!). But then I thought about the protection aspect. And so it went over to White.
Conjuration - Blue: The Sin magic version of this is Sloth, which is making people do what you want them to. Blue follows this I think.
Divination - White: Divine, divination. I really don't have another reason.
Enchantment - Red: I can think of no reason, other than manipulating people's emotions and things with spells like charm.
Evocation - White: The Sun is the ultimate source of energy, and that's why I associated White with Evocation.
Illusion - Black: Mostly just did this because of the association of Illusion with shadowmagic.
Necromancy - Black: Death! Undead! Skulls!! Black and Necromancy go hand in hand.
Transmutation - Green: Evolution and mutations are in nature.
Universal - Grey: Since Universal covers everything, it could be Blue. But I went with Grey or Colorless because why not?
And the Elemental Schools!
Air - Red: Much like with the domain, I associate Air with freedom.
Earth - Green: Just copied the domain here.
Fire - Red: Fire is again, the symbol of Fire.
Water - Blue: The symbol of Blue.
Metal - Blue: Technology and Blue go together.
Void - Black: I reused the domain reasoning.
Wood - Green: Since a tree is the symbol of Green, this fits!
...
Each of the colors have three schools of magic. And Grey is in there too!
What do you guys think about these color choices?
I also looked at the main and additional gods and figured out their new color alignments. Most of them have three colors. A few have four and a few, like Zon-kuthon, have only two colors. Ahriman is entirely Black, and is the only one with a single color. None of the gods have all five colors. I don't feel like listing them all though.
Blue = Mind, White = Protection/Healing, Black = Death, Red = Destruction, Green = Transforming.
Even though Illusion is shadow magic, it messes with the mind, which is under Blue's domain.
This is how I would do the School colors:
Abjuration White: Abjuration is about protection, and that's one of the schticks of the White sphere. Remember all those Circle of Protection spells?
Conjuration White: I say White because of the healing, but really all colors of Magic conjure creatures.
Divination Blue: Many Blue cards are about checking out your opponent's deck and making them get rid of stuff.
Enchantment Blue: I say Blue because, as you said, it's about manipulating another's mind. Again, a lot of Blue cards are about forcing your opponent to discard cards.
Evocation Red: Red is all about destruction and has quite a bit of direct damage spells. This is the epitome of Red.
Illusion Blue: Again, Blue because illusion is messing with another's mind. While Pathfinder equates Illusion with Shadows, it is really easy to reflavor it with mist or other such.
Necromancy Black: This is a "duh" one, as Black deals with death and undeath, and that's what necromancy is all about.
Transmutation Green: How many green cards are all about boosting the attack and defense numbers?
Universal I would have to agree.
Of course, these are based on 10 year old reasonings, and they may have changed. Of course, choose which ones you think is more accurate.
I didn't know that those colors were associated with those effects. I was just going off the color wheel.
I originally had Evocation as Red, and Enchantment as White, but then I swapped them because I thought it made more sense based on the color wheel. Evocation could also be Black, because of the mad power grab.
I had also thought about Illusion being Blue because of the mind thing. But in the Golarion setting, Illusion is Shadow. And my homebrew setting is a spinoff of Golarion.
I didn't even connect the dots that Conjuration has healing spells. Which would make it White. Or Green, based on the Domain selections. It could even be Black, manipulating people for power.
Divination. I could see Blue being that because of the power of the mind. Telepathy and such.
Honestly, all of these could be Blue. And I'm less concerned with the schools of magic than with the Domains, since they actually matter for gods and such.