| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is always strange when people want to impose their philosphy on a game, and they can't comprehend that:
a) various thoughtful inteligent people can have widely different world views and philosphies,
b) that isn't likely to change so we should play nice and get along,
c) most gamers just want to game and not be preached to.
We just want something simple as a framework to work with, to build our own games and stories. If we have lots of options and variant rules - which we do - then all the better.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
It is always strange when people want to impose their philosphy on a game, and they can't comprehend that:
a) various thoughtful inteligent people can have widely different world views and philosphies,
b) that isn't likely to change so we should play nice and get along,
c) most gamers just want to game and not be preached to.We just want something simple as a framework to work with, to build our own games and stories. If we have lots of options and variant rules - which we do - then all the better.
Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and white and leaves a lot of potential character builds off the table with a lack of support for neutral champions and non-religious tank classes in general. Not having a baked-in good vs evil, law vs chaos default assumption makes adding other systems in later easier anyway.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and white
There is literally an off switch for the system in the variant rules.
and leaves a lot of potential character builds off the table with a lack of support for neutral champions and non-religious tank classes in general. Not having a baked-in good vs evil, law vs chaos default assumption makes adding other systems in later easier anyway.
I mean I'm all for the creation of Cause based champions (insert generic cause here). I've asked for a martial and a primal defender class as well.
I just don't see what they have to do with the alignment system. Paizo just haven't decided to write them yet.
You are reading in restrictions to the game that just aren't there. So the default isn't what you want? It reflects the default assumptions of the history of the game. Just play what you want.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think alignment for the sake of clerics and who they are allowed to follow is fine
But otherwise the heavy alignment mechanics, like alignment damage, shouldn’t be in the game, at least in my and many others’ opinions
Things like The Dragon Prince or Game of Thrones or LotR or The Witcher doesn’t have people get damaged by alignment because alignment damage would make writing complex characters who aren’t 2-dimensional hard
LotR arguably has something close to alignment damage. Gandalf talks about the secret fire. There is sacred starlight that frightens monsters. But really none of those stories had religion as the focus of a story.
Which is much easier now in PF2 as you don't have to have a cleric any more.
I don't tend to think of my RPG games as well themed sweeping high fantasy. It tends to be B grade at best. But it is our (the players) story so it is still fun.
Seeing that people are really focusing on story, roleplay, character and other similar things now, alignment damage shouldn’t have carried over. D&D did away with alignment damage, other TTRPGs don’t have any alignment damage stuff, like MoM, Shadowrun and other things doesn’t have any alignment damage in it.
So go play with those games rather than made PF2 like the other games. Let it have its distinct flavour. Let different things exist. Why are you trying to destroy other peoples toys?
PF2 is descended from war gaming minatures clear sides and a combat focus is part of the default genre. There is a wargaming element to PF2 not just role playing.
I feel like having alignment so integrated into mechanics hurts complex villains or characters
You have no basis for that statement. Outside of your feelings it is just not true.
The only reason alignment damage exists is because it existed in the previous edition and that’s it.
That is one of the reasons the designers have said. But it is not the only reason. Alignment is a useful tool for world building. It was changed and enhanced for PF2.
In D&D I think they moved towards radiant damage. Which is the closest they have there.
Alignment damage doesn’t exist in an era where people are focusing a lot more on story and rp
What your group is doing has very little to do with what my group is doing. If you want a role play first game then go play a system designed for it. If you want to role play and have some mechanics around it, PF2 with alignment is a good system.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and whiteThere is literally an off switch for the system in the variant rules.
and leaves a lot of potential character builds off the table with a lack of support for neutral champions and non-religious tank classes in general. Not having a baked-in good vs evil, law vs chaos default assumption makes adding other systems in later easier anyway.I mean I'm all for the creation of Cause based champions (insert generic cause here). I've asked for a marital and a primal defender class as well.
I just don't see what they have to do with the alignment system. Paizo just haven't decided to write them yet.
You are reading in restrictions to the game that just aren't there. So the default isn't what you want? It reflects the default assumptions of the history of the game. Just play what you want.
“Marital defender class”
You may now KICK the bride!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I think alignment for the sake of clerics and who they are allowed to follow is fine
But otherwise the heavy alignment mechanics, like alignment damage, shouldn’t be in the game, at least in my and many others’ opinions
Things like The Dragon Prince or Game of Thrones or LotR or The Witcher doesn’t have people get damaged by alignment because alignment damage would make writing complex characters who aren’t 2-dimensional hard
LotR arguably has something close to alignment damage. Gandalf talks about the secret fire. There is sacred starlight that frightens monsters. But really none of those stories had religion as the focus of a story.
I don't tend to think of my RPG games as well themed sweeping high fantasy. It tends to be B grade at best. But it is our (the players) story so it is still fun.Seeing that people are really focusing on story, roleplay, character and other similar things now, alignment damage shouldn’t have carried over. D&D did away with alignment damage, other TTRPGs don’t have any alignment damage stuff, like MoM, Shadowrun and other things doesn’t have any alignment damage in it.
So go play with those games rather than made PF2 like the other games. Let it have its distinct flavour. Let different things exist. Why are you trying to destroy other peoples toys?
PF2 is descended from war gaming minatures clear sides and a combat focus is part of the default genre. There is a wargaming element to PF2 not just role playing.
I feel like having alignment so integrated into mechanics hurts complex villains or characters
You have no basis for that statement. Outside of your feelings it is just not true.
That is one of the reasons the designers have said. But it is not the only reason. Alignment is a useful tool for world building. It was changed and...The only reason alignment damage exists is because it existed in the previous edition and that’s it.
You can still have roleplay with mechanics without alignment, such as “making an impression” or making a check to determine if someone is lying or the numerous fun spells and cantrips like prestidigitation, or the numerous ancestry, class and especially skill feats that are all about social stuff
|
A good outsider was not immune good damage and vice versa, they were just not weak to it.That’s because “Good Damage” wasn’t a thing in P1.
Holy Weapon enchant for example said it overcome the corresponding DR and Evil creatures took extra damage.
“Aligned” damage wasn’t a thing.
You are misremembering how that worked. "Aligned" damage was a thing, just as we have both stated it bypassed resistance.
This power makes the weapon good-aligned and thus bypasses the corresponding damage reduction.You're repeating what I just said and telling me I’m wrong?
There wasn’t aligned damage in that it wasn’t “you take 2d6 Good damage” like in P2, you had specific instances of the attack being X-aligned and thus overcoming DR.
I said it first, and you responded to it, so I responded to it!
Why are we doing the spiderman meme?
No, you brought up “good damage” which was not a thing in P1, there was no moral-elemental style damage types.
Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and whiteThere is literally an off switch for the system in the variant rules.
Unfortunately it's far from simple than take a variant rule and apply.
What to do with all the alignment damage mechanics for example?|
|
Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and whiteThere is literally an off switch for the system in the variant rules.Unfortunately it's far from simple than take a variant rule and apply.
What to do with all the alignment damage mechanics for example?
Convert it all into an umbrella Divine/sacred/Radiant damage? Just off the top of my head.
Convert it all into an umbrella Divine/sacred/Radiant damage? Just off the top of my head.Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and whiteThere is literally an off switch for the system in the variant rules.Unfortunately it's far from simple than take a variant rule and apply.
What to do with all the alignment damage mechanics for example?
Like this?
Is it taking all alignment damage and making it affect everyone?If so, what about resistances, weaknesses, and even alignment damage immunities?
Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and whiteThere is literally an off switch for the system in the variant rules.Unfortunately it's far from simple than take a variant rule and apply.
What to do with all the alignment damage mechanics for example?
If you go with only extreme evil and good then that is probably want you want anyway.
If you want to go further it is very easy - delete all those abilities or just do not use those creatures. There are lots and lots of other creatures and spells.
Or if you must use them, then redefine them all as another energy type. Yes it is not as good, but you are the one after something specific from the game you'll need to choose. I'd go with radiant and shadow, or fire and acid if you want to reuse existing types.
Convert it all into an umbrella Divine/sacred/Radiant damage? Just off the top of my head.Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and whiteThere is literally an off switch for the system in the variant rules.Unfortunately it's far from simple than take a variant rule and apply.
What to do with all the alignment damage mechanics for example?Like this?
Is it taking all alignment damage and making it affect everyone?
If so, what about resistances, weaknesses, and even alignment damage immunities?
Choosing is so hard.
|
|
Convert it all into an umbrella Divine/sacred/Radiant damage? Just off the top of my head.Except that the way PF2 does that gets in the way of any alignment system that isn't black and whiteThere is literally an off switch for the system in the variant rules.Unfortunately it's far from simple than take a variant rule and apply.
What to do with all the alignment damage mechanics for example?Like this?
Is it taking all alignment damage and making it affect everyone?
If so, what about resistances, weaknesses, and even alignment damage immunities?
Are alignment immunities even a thing? Aside from the default Good doesn’t hurt Good etc
Are alignment immunities even a thing? Aside from the default Good doesn’t hurt Good etcIs it taking all alignment damage and making it affect everyone?
If so, what about resistances, weaknesses, and even alignment damage immunities?
Wants alignment immunity but not alignments? ....
If you go with only extreme evil and good then that is probably want you want anyway.
In truth no. The rules of extreme good and evil end up restricting clerics' powers like the Divine Lance to a non-functional situation. If alignment doesn't matter, many alignment-dependent spells break down or become too strict and situational.
If you want to go further it is very easy - delete all those abilities or just do not use those creatures. There are lots and lots of other creatures and spells.
Unfortunately it's not just creatures, it has several spells and class skills in between. Would they have to be banned too?
Or if you must use them, then redefine them all as another energy type. Yes it is not as good, but you are the one after something specific from the game you'll need to choose. I'd go with radiant and shadow, or fire and acid if you want to reuse existing types.
I agree that in the creature realm it's probably the best way to handle it. However, this does not solve the problem of several divine spells and classes linked to the divine.
Are alignment immunities even a thing? Aside from the default Good doesn’t hurt Good etcIs it taking all alignment damage and making it affect everyone?
If so, what about resistances, weaknesses, and even alignment damage immunities?Wants alignment immunity but not alignments? ....
The problem is not not wanting to. Is what to do with it?
Once we remove the alignments, how do we readjust everything? What to do with spells and abilities that supposedly only affect a 1/3 of the creature's spectrum? Just ignore everything and throw it away? Or make everyone vulnerable to what they weren't before?
Alignment mechanics have been so hard coded into the game that changing them simply affects too many things.
Don't get me wrong. For me, it's just not worth messing with. But the game forcing this kind of mechanics that obviously doesn't suit more complex scenarios than good vs evil for me was a bad design decision. Because if this mechanic simply didn't exist, the opposite problem wouldn't exist (if someone wants to make a good versus evil mechanic in a game that doesn't implement it, it's much simpler than removing the current mechanic that exists in PF2).
I don't really see problem there. "Good damage is now radiant and your divine spells that deal alignment damage now deal damage of your deity's damage types". With sorcerers same thing or you let them freely choose between four different damage types.
Then it would start to affect everyone, would that be it? What would previously only affect creatures of the opposite alignment and be ignored by neutrals (or halved in the case of Divine Decree) now affects all "infidels"?
|
Isn't that the whole point of removing alignment damage that you don't want alignment to affect things mechanically meaning its not technical optimal counter to alignment damage just to be neutral? Or do you want identical mechanics with different terminology?
Like do note, alignment damage spells don't do particularly lot of damage. Almost all monsters you face are likely to be evil anyway so its more like good/chaos/law damage that is a niche. Its more equivalent of "most creatures are vulnerable to fire, but sometimes you face creatures that are weak to it or resist/are immune to it"
I think you are kinda making it sound like harder change than it actually is.
Once we remove the alignments, how do we readjust everything? What to do with spells and abilities that supposedly only affect a 1/3 of the creature's spectrum? Just ignore everything and throw it away? Or make everyone vulnerable to what they weren't before?
Alignment mechanics have been so hard coded into the game that changing them simply affects too many things.
You either do one of the recommened changes - the extreme alignments only is the easiest and it does give you what many people have been asking for - or you delete alignment, or you make your own adjustments. These all work.
I don't have any problem making changes. I am very happy to rebalance something myself. Even make a few mistakes and then tweak it and keep going. It is a game not rocket science. Give it a try. I'm not going to do it for you.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Are alignment immunities even a thing? Aside from the default Good doesn’t hurt Good etcIs it taking all alignment damage and making it affect everyone?
If so, what about resistances, weaknesses, and even alignment damage immunities?Wants alignment immunity but not alignments? ....
The problem is not not wanting to. Is what to do with it?
Once we remove the alignments, how do we readjust everything? What to do with spells and abilities that supposedly only affect a 1/3 of the creature's spectrum? Just ignore everything and throw it away? Or make everyone vulnerable to what they weren't before?
Alignment mechanics have been so hard coded into the game that changing them simply affects too many things.
Don't get me wrong. For me, it's just not worth messing with. But the game forcing this kind of mechanics that obviously doesn't suit more complex scenarios than good vs evil for me was a bad design decision. Because if this mechanic simply didn't exist, the opposite problem wouldn't exist (if someone wants to make a good versus evil mechanic in a game that doesn't implement it, it's much simpler than removing the current mechanic that exists in PF2).
I don't really see problem there. "Good damage is now radiant and your divine spells that deal alignment damage now deal damage of your deity's damage types". With sorcerers same thing or you let them freely choose between four different damage types.Then it would start to affect everyone, would that be it? What would previously only affect creatures of the opposite alignment and be ignored by neutrals (or halved in the case of Divine Decree) now affects all "infidels"?
This.
The variant rules aren’t good
Alignment is so heavily baked into mechanics that it’s difficult or impossible to play without it, variant rules or not.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
In my opinion it's simply a mechanic that just didn't bring anything good to the game.
In practice it just makes it easier to identify who is good and who is evil in a supernatural way, it is extremely exploitable, any player knows that if you choose to be neutral you will basically be immune to all alignment mechanics (nothing better for face fiends and evil clerics rather than being neutral) and even clerics of a deity often manage to be of a neutral alignment allowing them to gain the benefits of alignment spells and damage while evading weaknesses in addition to alignment-dependent spells being unreliable (However, it is quite common in many adventures that a large part of your opponents are evil, which also ends up overestimating the advantage of causing good damage).
I'm sorry, but it's just a bad mechanic and hard to get around.
It's a good question. The game says that if you have such spell prepared you will recognize it but says nothing about those specificities in a spell.
Yet mechanically if you are the one receiving the damage you will know the damage type you are suffering. It's unlikely that a GM says "you are suffering X dmg from an unknown alignment damage" just because you choose to be chaotic good.
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
So that lessens the concerns with Divine Lance at least, given authorities will need more proof than that.
I’m no fan of alignment, so I wonder just how difficult it would be to strip it out. “Every mortal character is neutral for the purposes of spells, unless they have an alignment tag/aura” was the rule we went by in 1E, I’ll have to see what corner cases that doesn’t cover in 2E.
I’m not sure why you would choose to interpret it in such a way that it makes the game unambiguous. Can you post the rules that make you think that in the other thread, so we can stop cluttering this one up?
https://2e.aonprd.com/Feats.aspx?ID=834
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There seems to be some consensus that alignment is more relevant to extraplanars or outsiders, whatever we are calling them these days, than it is to mortals native to the prime material. I must confess I may be carrying around some old edition baggage, but it seems like P2e streamlined the mechanics supporting alignment and may have thereby removed some of the specifics that kept the system functional. The GM can and should actively adjudicate what constitutes a sufficiently opposite alignment to be susceptible to aligned damage. Alignment as a tangible, mechanically significant concept is central to DnD and its successor PF. Devils are made out of evil. They may exercise some nuance, they may explore a wide palette of depravity, they may even dabble in short term almost good in order to facilitate longer term evil. But their very substance is evil made tangible. Taking complex philosophical ideas and equating them to tangible, material values is a foundational aspect of this brand of roleplaying. War-Murder-Torture is awful. Some things are worse. So much worse in fact, the CRB (and an evolving sense of societal decency) asks that we obfuscate it behind Lines and Veils. But I want to defeat War-Murder-Torture-andWorse! I want to take a stand against the symbolic representation of all that awfulness and I want to Bonk it on the head with goodness made manifest! Roleplaying allows us to abstract complex ideas into relatable situations using standardized symbolism. But this does not necessitate the death of nuance. Planar entities represent extreme manifestations, the highest highs and the lowest low, but there is more to the concept. Mortals might use the same labels to broadly categorize their morality but they must not be considered equivalent to beings quite literally composed of those labels. The Detect Alignment spell even allows for mechanical differences in how different targets express their alignment. A commoner or even a low level adventurer (but not a Cleric or other divine caster) can have LG written on their character sheet in towering bold letters and it makes no difference. Overlooking this nuance is detrimental to the system as a whole. If spellcasting and various magical abilities interact directly with creatures of strong alignment in mechanically significant ways, we have a fixed metric to use as reference. This makes it easier to explore the thousands of shades that lie between our reference points, not harder. Mortals are free to set their own destiny, to change their alignment through a hard won redemption arc or even on a whim. The alignment system gives weight to these decisions by providing a framework to determine how these differing shades of morality contrast with the concrete representations of absolute alignment. This argument brought to you by the Coalition for Bonking complex metaphysical problems on the head.
Nothing in there says you get to identify the tags the spell has. Why are you adding that in when it seems to cause problems?
Well i assume that correctly recognition of spell would give you full information about it otherwise it would not be correct recognition at all.So what exacly should be gain from that action from your persectve?
|
|
The +1 AC/save bonus for a critical success is pretty nice. And knowing what spell it is can help you decide what resources are worth using to avoid it (rerolls and other daily abilities) or to mitigate the effects if it hits/your save fails.
If you don’t want alignment damage to trivialize identifying bad guys, why are you interpreting spells to allow them to do that?
|
|
Nothing in there says you get to identify the tags the spell has. Why are you adding that in when it seems to cause problems?Well i assume that correctly recognition of spell would give you full information about it otherwise it would not be correct recognition at all.So what exacly should be gain from that action from your persectve?
The feat does what it says it does. You identify the spell if you’re successful.
The +1 AC/save bonus for a critical success is pretty nice. And knowing what spell it is can help you decide what resources are worth using to avoid it (rerolls and other daily abilities) or to mitigate the effects if it hits/your save fails.
If you don’t want alignment damage to trivialize identifying bad guys, why are you interpreting spells to allow them to do that?
I do not. Because i do not have alignment in my games.Currently i am just discussing what recognition of spell actually entail
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing in there says you get to identify the tags the spell has. Why are you adding that in when it seems to cause problems?Well i assume that correctly recognition of spell would give you full information about it otherwise it would not be correct recognition at all.So what exacly should be gain from that action from your persectve?
You recognize the spell being cast as Divine Lance.
How is that not correct recognition?
Nothing in there says you get to identify the tags the spell has. Why are you adding that in when it seems to cause problems?Well i assume that correctly recognition of spell would give you full information about it otherwise it would not be correct recognition at all.So what exacly should be gain from that action from your persectve?You recognize the spell being cast as Divine Lance.
How is that not correct recognition?
So for example when wizard recognize fireball he will recognize it as evocation spell that deal 6d6 fire damage on Area 20-foot burst or he will just get the name of the spell?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I mean, it's not exactly a new idea in TTRPGs to explore the gap between "good" and "evil" as they are commonly understood as desirable and undesirable outcomes versus "Good" and "Evil" as elemental forces tied to outer planes.
Like the whole "the ultimate villain is an Angel, and your ally is a sympathetic (but still Evil) Fiend" idea is not new.
The wizard might also recall it is an evocation that causes an explosion of fire large enough to incinerate a platoon formation of soldiers.
Fireball affiliation to Evocation is the information contained in the tags
I wonder if a Paizo employee or someone at Paizo could give us insight into why they added alignment mechanics
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I wonder if a Paizo employee or someone at Paizo could give us insight into why they added alignment mechanics
They did not add it they simply inherit it from dnd
|
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The wizard might also recall it is an evocation that causes an explosion of fire large enough to incinerate a platoon formation of soldiers.Fireball affiliation to Evocation is the information contained in the tags
And the school of magic, which to my knowledge is not a tag.
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Like it's pretty clear that there are some things that you keep in your game to make it recognizable as the same kind of thing as previous versions and close relatives.
Like "My character is a Chaotic Good Elf Fighter with an 18 Dexterity" is something that everybody in this hobby recognizes what it is whereas "My character is rebel-with-a-heart-of-gold Glaxbeerton Mercenary with a +4 Agility" is something you might have to think about.
You can change some things, but the more things you change the more risk you run of your game being unrecognizable. If your question is "why wasn't X changed" it's probably "because we erred on the side of caution in making sure our game is recognizable in the tradition of similar games."
Like if you were actually building the game from the ground up, before alignment one thing you would seriously consider dropping is "the Constitution stat" since it's largely vestigial as it applies to only three things (HP, Fort saves, and "holding your breath/starvation"). Con could be very easily rolled into one of the other Physical stats and a new Physical stat that actually applies to some skills could be carved out of Str/Dex. That, to me, is more glaring than "you can still be Lawful Good"
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
One thing for which Alignment is invaluable is as a shorthand for describing "how a GM should run these NPCs".
Like two identical stat blocks for bandit clan leaders except for one is NE and one is CN are going to be played by most GMs very differently. It's a very efficient way to encode quite a bit of information.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Know what's also a tradition in TTRPGGs? Discarding stuff the table doesn't like.
All TTRPG's can be tailored to your table preferences.
And the school of magic, which to my knowledge is not a tag.The wizard might also recall it is an evocation that causes an explosion of fire large enough to incinerate a platoon formation of soldiers.Fireball affiliation to Evocation is the information contained in the tags
It is
https://2e.aonprd.com/Traits.aspx?ID=65https://2e.aonprd.com/Spells.aspx?ID=119
Know what's also a tradition in TTRPGGs? Discarding stuff the table doesn't like.
All TTRPG's can be tailored to your table preferences.
But as people have pointed out, alignment is so ingrained into mechanics it makes it difficult or nearly impossible even to play without alignment. Not only is there alignment damage but there are spells, feats and other things based entirely on or around alignment