Alignment loophole?

[hamishspence]

Packmaster

Its like one of the old prestige classes: specific organization, with a history, and goals.

As for alignment, what I like is changing alignment don not affect your powers. You could have a secretly corrupt CE priest of Moradin, and there would be no mechanical giveaway. Works well with Hidden Corruption storylines.

 

[Verdande]

They do. pg 163 in the DMG, under Divine Evil.

You can alter the nature of powers without changing their basic effects, making them feel more appropriate for the servants of evil gods.

So you could have evil paladins do necrotic damage, and that Astral Weapon power deal damage to good creatures, or whatever it is that you think would fit best.

 

[DreamChaser]

Unaligned means that (like most people) you don't view yourself as an embodyment of any given alignment. You live by a personal compass of moral behavior that you likely inherited from your culture and build with your life experiences. When the BIG QUESTIONS are raised, you are as likely as not to not take a stand or take the easier way out. You may give to the poor but only 10% of your extra income. You may take a stand against crime but only if you don't feel that you'd be in any personal risk. You probably don't hold up banks or kill old ladies but you probably speed, j-walk, and cheat on your taxes.

This doesn't mean that unaligned people are amoral it just means that they aren't paragons of virtue or vice.

DC

 

[Saitou]

I don't like unaligned, because unaligned is not the same as neutral. However, I understand that it's best kept as such for simplicity.

But I'm still making unaligned and neutral two different alignments in my campaign.

 

[Sanzuo]

I don't see unaligned as being the same as Neutral. In earlier editions, Neutral was still very much an alignment, with a creed and ideologies. Whereas now Unaligned is the same as leaving your alignment blank, or writing "none." You can either choose an alignment or not.

Edit: So to clarify, I see a vast majority of people being unaligned. They're simply trying to survive. They may have things they hate or enjoy and might have goals in life but are otherwise just doing their job and getting by. Beings that actually pick an alignment (chaotic evil, evil, good, lawful good) are actually rare. They have passion and drive and they aspire. These are the kinds of individuals who become leaders and adventurers, by actually caring.

 

[hamishspence]

the option for Neutral unaligned still exists

It said that the Unaligned gods are more likely to be the ones who see both good and Evil as necessary.

Neutral as "Upholds the Balance" was taken a little to far in 2nd ed: DMG description makes them pretty nutty. Mordenkainen in Epic Handbook is described as a bit like that: doing both Good and Evil to keep the Balance in line.

One superhero RPG I read argued it was impossible for any act to be neutral, and trying to balance acts was pretty crazy.

I see Unaligned as covering all the old neutral alignments, with difference being more personality than extreme "sides"

 

[Zimri]

Alignments via Firefly/serenity

Lawful Good: okay really I have nothing, closest I can come is Shepherd Book
Good: Malcolm Reynolds
Unaligned: Jayne Cobb
Evil: The Operative (the movie serenity), Jubal (objects in space), Niska
Chaotic Evil: Reavers

 

[Regicide]

I've always wanted to steal parts of Palladium RPG for DnD, the two big ones were using CON for starting HPs and the alignment system with good, selfish and evil. Half way there!

 

[Tripgnosis]

I've always hated the notion of having an alignment as a statistic. Particularly the ability to use magic to 'know alignment' it negates intrigue and alterior motives. Even if teh PC's didn't have the ability to detect someones alignment, the abilty exists making it hard for a mole to infiltrate an oganization like a church or something. It would seem pretty likely that his true motives would be found out by NPC's in the organization who had the ability to detect algnment. There were ways around it but still, I think alignment shouldn't be that easy to categorize and stick a label on. I don't like that in 4e there is anything with alignment prereqs. The fact that there are only a few just makes it more unbalanced. A statistic should either be used fairly universally, or not at all. Overall thogh, I like the new alignment system. More generalized is better in this case, personality and motivation needs more grey area. Your actions should dictate your alignment, not the other way around. 3e alignment was too restrictive cuz it was too specific.