Alignment restrictions kinda dumb

[Mavrickindigo]

So, I'm reading up through the updated document and notice now that a vigilante must be within one alignment step of his/her social identity. Me and my friends think that's pretty dumb, actually. For example, if you want to have a villain who is actually a horrible CE monster, but in his civilian form, be a law-abiding citizen, you can't do that anymore. Why is there a restriction to this? Having you be two vastly different alignments was one of the more interesting aspects of the class.

[Mike Lindner]

I think the restriction makes sense. A CE vigilante might pretend to be LG as his social identity, but his actual alignment wouldn't really be LG. After all, if his alignment truly was LG, why would he then want to use his vigilante identity that is so monstrous?

They are two identities, but the underlying individual is the same.

[Entryhazard]

A CE vigilante can ping as NN in social guise (one step in the law axis and one in the good)

[Mike Lindner]

I think the real question on the dual alignments is how does Pharasma decide where to send the soul, random die roll?

[Entryhazard]

Mike Lindner wrote:

I think the real question on the dual alignments is how does Pharasma decide where to send the soul, random die roll?

I think it boils down to whether persona he was when he died

or, more appropriately, which one the vigilante considers his "true" identity (like Peter Parker is the "real" identity of Spider-Man in contrast with Superman whose mask is actually Clark Kent)

[Snorb]

Erik the Cleric: So... About this vigilante schtick of yours. What's your alignment?

Sir Reginald von Milquetoaste, He of the Battle-Yellowed Pantaloons: Lawful Good, why?

Freddy the Fighter: What about your vigilante identity?

Sir Reginald: RONALLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLLD JUSTICE's alignment is Chaotic Neutral! Why do you ask?

Rita the Rogue: Yeah, um... Lawful Good people don't do the stuff Ronald Justice does.

Freddy: You crucified a dog, man.

Erik: You made a guy cut off his own leg and then you beat him to death with it.

Rita: You stole all the gold from the bad guys and spent it at the whorehouse.

Amy the Alchemist: You blew up the entire Underdark.

Freddy: You sold the bad guys' families into slavery.

Rita: You chained an antipaladin up in a galleon's cargo hold, armor and all, capsized it, then sank it in the middle of the Northern Ocean.

Sir Reginald: No, that was RONALLLLLLLLLLLLD JUSTICE who did all that, not poor mere meek Sir Reginald von Milquetoast...

Rita: ....You know we know Ronald Justice is just you with a Red Mage hat and a Blue Mage domino mask and cape, right?

[LazarX]

Entryhazard wrote:

A CE vigilante can ping as NN in social guise (one step in the law axis and one in the good)

The restriction is within ONE step. You can't get from chaotic evil to true neutral in one step TOTAL.

[Mike Lindner]

LazarX wrote:

Entryhazard wrote:

A CE vigilante can ping as NN in social guise (one step in the law axis and one in the good)

The restriction is within ONE step. You can't get from chaotic evil to true neutral in one step TOTAL.

That's not true.

round 2 wrote:

A vigilante can possess two alignments, one for each of his identities. When in an identity, he is treated as having that identity’s alignment for all spells, magic items, and abilities that target alignment. For the purposes of meeting a qualification for a feat, class, or other ability, he is only eligible if both of his alignments meet the requirements. A vigilante’s two alignments must be within one step of each other on each alignment axis. For example, a vigilante with a lawful neutral social identity could have a vigilante identity that is lawful good, lawful neutral, lawful evil, neutral, neutral good, or neutral evil.

[Zwordsman]

Mike Lindner wrote:

I think the real question on the dual alignments is how does Pharasma decide where to send the soul, random die roll?

I think I remember the PDF saying that the social you is the "true" you.

So I'd guess that is your true alignment.

Personally I think you should be required to chose social or vigilante as the true "you" and that dictates: Where you go when you die and a few other things.

That way you can decide.

Are you like Batman, where batman is the real "him" or are you the Question, where your actually Renee Montoya and the question is a tool you use.

[SAMAS]

Mavrickindigo wrote:

So, I'm reading up through the updated document and notice now that a vigilante must be within one alignment step of his/her social identity. Me and my friends think that's pretty dumb, actually. For example, if you want to have a villain who is actually a horrible CE monster, but in his civilian form, be a law-abiding citizen, you can't do that anymore. Why is there a restriction to this? Having you be two vastly different alignments was one of the more interesting aspects of the class.

There is a difference between "Being" and "Pretending".

[Arachnofiend]

Mike Lindner wrote:

LazarX wrote:

Entryhazard wrote:

A CE vigilante can ping as NN in social guise (one step in the law axis and one in the good)

The restriction is within ONE step. You can't get from chaotic evil to true neutral in one step TOTAL.

That's not true.

round 2 wrote:

A vigilante can possess two alignments, one for each of his identities. When in an identity, he is treated as having that identity’s alignment for all spells, magic items, and abilities that target alignment. For the purposes of meeting a qualification for a feat, class, or other ability, he is only eligible if both of his alignments meet the requirements. A vigilante’s two alignments must be within one step of each other on each alignment axis. For example, a vigilante with a lawful neutral social identity could have a vigilante identity that is lawful good, lawful neutral, lawful evil, neutral, neutral good, or neutral evil.

This was a change in the recent playtest update; it was originally only one step.

This is better, but I still think lifting the alignment restriction entirely would be best.

[Troodos]

Entryhazard wrote:

Peter Parker is the "real" identity of Spider-Man in contrast with Superman whose mask is actually Clark Kent)

Uh, no. Superman is the mask. Clark is who he identifies as, not Kal-El. Clark is who he was raised as, and who he is when he's around his family and loved ones. Superman is his idea of an ideal person, a manifestation of the hope and love he bears for everyone, but not an actual person. To quote him: "Clark is who I am, Superman is what I do."

A better contrast would be Batman, whose Bruce Wayne persona is almost entirely faked. Once again, to quote: "That [Bruce] isn't what I call myself, in my head"

[MMCJawa]

I'm fine with the revised alignment rules. Someone who is really good but pretending to be CE is a bit too weird for me, since that amount of gulf in alignment would almost certainly require the good individual to perform a ton of evil acts. The current rules are a bit more manageable, since I could see a good person pretending to be neutral without too much difficulty.

[M1k31]

MMCJawa wrote:

I'm fine with the revised alignment rules. Someone who is really good but pretending to be CE is a bit too weird for me, since that amount of gulf in alignment would almost certainly require the good individual to perform a ton of evil acts. The current rules are a bit more manageable, since I could see a good person pretending to be neutral without too much difficulty.

Agreed, the only possible reason to remove the current versions were if you were playing some kind of "cursed" character or a completely split personality who generally could not control when they change, nor what they change into, and further lack any useful knowledge ties between as the Vigilante does now... which would work great as a third party/archetype, but not as a standard vigilante flavor.