I am challenging the general concept of alignments and the way they are used in most OGL settings and games. I do understand where they come from. And I realize their importance when a new player is introduced to rpgs. But what do they offer to an experienced player?
Hi fagura, interesting topic! Here's my thoughts; they might not be popular because I think the arguments against the d&d moral compass are a little overstated given the context.
I don't think there is anything wrong with a simplified moral system, because I reckon it probably works for most gamers out there. From my own experience, deeper explorations haven't been necessary, and I've managed to tell interesting and compelling stories without the need for modification. I don't believe great DMing, immersive, or compelling stories and commitment to exploration of definitions of good and evil are mutually exclusive. Philosophy hasn't yet answered these questions, and humanity has been around for a long time, so I don't expect it from my story-telling vehicle. And you know, if d&d can posit a system of theology and afterlife that is obviously a conditional tool available to gamers, why is the alignment system so vilified?
Further, I honestly think that many of your questions could actually be rationalized within the simplified d&d alignment quite easily without any breakdown of suspended disbelief or taking away from the immersion. The devil's advocate would play a mean fiddle against my contentions, sure, because I think things can often be more black and white but for the want of an interesting debate.
The woman who was forced to choose could not be considered evil, though whoever forced her into the decision would be. No number of lives lost can be weighed against any other number in terms of degree of goodness. Depending on the law of the land, she might be considered non-lawful though.
Is a person with schizophrenia evil? Depends on the actions they wreak. A thought or intent doesn't cause grief, so not all schizophrenics are evil; not even the acts themselves are evil, but the intent behind them is; an action executed for the purpose of causing loss or suffering would be evil. It is the primal essence of these actions that cling to the soul, so although good deeds might be performed the next morning, detect evil, or a god's interest in or abandonment of a character depend on this. Detect evil spell can even tell you the strength of evilness that emenates (sp.) from the subject, so when you answer this question for your players, you can give them a guage, if that makes sense? Someone who truly atones and genuinely seeks to correct their own ways is not evil.
Indeed mentalities are changeable, but the alignment system allows for this and DMs are encouraged to monitor this.
A character wants to commit a very evil act. Nevertheless, he never does it. Was it because he never got the chance? Was it because sth internal stopped him every time?
That's up to the DM. So the DM knows.
No. He never hurt anyone thinking.
Does he become evil the moment he does it?
The moment he intentionally proceeds to execute an action that will bring about sorrow, fear and pain himself? Yes.
Fourthly, there is a big chapter in human behavior that is called Motivation. The same action made to serve different motives might be totally evil, totally good or very shady. Let's take the previous example. That woman killed a 1.000 people tribe. This is certainly an evil act. Her alignment though might be evil if she did it just for fun, shady if she did it to save her family and even good if she believed that was the way to save humanity. Are we to discuss the motivation behind all characters' actions to determine what tab to put them under?
I find your suggested alignment outcomes here reasonable
Especially in terms of much gaming, I think the simplification is fine and generally makes sense, but I do agree that if you wanted to develop a compelling story which really wanted to explore the shades of grey, or play with the commonfolk's flawed ideas of morality it would require either a little house-ruling, or a discussion with the game group, or whatever. I'm not yet convinced that working with, modifying or completely abandoning alignment will cause the mechanics to collapse completely where slight redefinitions or explanations can easily be used to ensure it all still works, and I strongly disagree with the contention that the alignment system is a crutch for the inexperienced and more advanced gamers are likely to become lost when they inevitably find the need to abandon it.
Anyway, just my own reflections on the topic!