Changing Alignment

[Anubus]

I've been DMing the same campaign for over a year now, and over that time I've gotten a pretty good idea of how my PC's will react to different situations. The problem is that how they tend to react doesn't agree with their alignments, at least not anymore. It's usually just one step away from what they say they are, but I no longer agree with any the 4 PC's. So I'm wondering how others have dealt with this sort of thing. One of the PC's has a prestige class that requires a specific alignment, which he would no longer meet if I changed him to what he's been playing. Another is a NG paladin from the book of hallowed might, but he's been playing really lawful, would he just change to the PHB paladin and convert his abilities? The last problem is that half of my group, including the paladin, just can't seem to grasp the idea that lawful good isn't lawful stupid. I'd appreciate any help anyone has to offer. Thanks

 

[clark411]

I'd ask them for their character sheets and alter their alignments and return them. I'd also have a list of what they've done which is in tune with these new alignments. The player with the Alignment restriction for his PRC would have to start acting in accordance with that alignment for awhile, the issue of the paladin would be up to you as a DM, and the third issue needs to be explained more before you'll get much helpful advice. There are dozens of ways to play stupidly as a paladin.. what is he or she doing that makes this an instance of LS?

 

[drothgery]

Unless I'm misreading things, the original poster has a player who's playing the Neutral Good variant paladin from the Book of Hallowed Might. The player is having that character act in ways that the DM believes are Lawful Good, but the DM can't convince the player that Lawful Good is not Lawful Stupid.

 

[Wulf Ratbane]

Just remind your players that actions define alignment, not the other way around.

And that YOU decide what their alignment is, not what they have written on their sheet.

In fact, you don't even have to tell THEM what their alignment is. I'd wager Hitler thought he was a pretty good guy. Let them figure it out amongst themselves.

And thus, I invoke Godwin. Sorry bout that, I just get frustrated by DM's who let their players run roughshod over the alignment system...


Wulf

 

[Olgar Shiverstone]

Then there's the true rat-bastard approach:

Track the alignment of the characters based on their actions, but don't tell the players what that alignment is. When something dependent upon alignment occurs (paladin detects evil, someone casts a Holy Smite, etc), have the appropriate result based upon your secret alignments. When the player complains: "Hey, that shouldn't affect my character, it only affects XX alignment!" just smile wickedly.

After all, it's not like the characters carry around alignment scorecards ...

 

[Anubus]

Well those are all excellent suggestions. Though I'm sorry for not attending your nazi school of DMing, Wulf. I wouldn't say that just because I'm concerned about my players enjoying themselves, instead of going gestapo on them for not following an oscure part of the game, that I let them do whatever they want. The truth is that most of the time, what alignment they think the are, and what I think they are doesn't really matter. However, as the next part of the campaign takes them into the abyss, things like lawful and good will possibly become important.

I really like all the suggestions, for different reasons. Letting them find out that they're alignment has changed when they suddenly become affected by a spell that didn't used to affect them, sounds really fun, cruel, but fun. I think it would be better if they are aware of it though, rather than having to expain why the spell now affects them, while in the middle of a battle.

I've been toiling with the idea of letting the group appoint alignments to each other, including the player who we're discussing at the time. It might take abit of time, but at least then everyone will understand the changes, if any, that do occur.

 

[cptg1481]

Me Too Dude

I have recently had the same problem myself....

What I intend to do is let the players track each others alignments via the hackmaster alignment sheets. (not becasue I like hackmaster but because I don't have to remake a tracking sheet)

I'll have them all assess the others actions after each session in terms of alignment and how close they have been playing. I will also keep track but knowing human nature I think that them knowing that they will be rated by their peers after each session will make them "act" more closely to their chosen alignment.

I guess I'll have to come up with some form of penalty like say minus 10-20% experiance for a session.

If it gets silly or they go way over then I might make them change their alignments but since they don't have classess with alignment restrictions this is really no biggie.

Just my two coppers...

 

[shilsen]

What Wulf and Olgar said.

I let my players know at the start of the campaign that while their PCs will start with whatever alignment they choose, alignments may shift over time due to PC actions. And unless the character has abilities that are dependent on alignment (paladin, druid, etc.), the PC is not going to know about the change until he encounters a situation where it matters (most likely magic). Simple.

 

[fusangite]

Well, alignment is a fundamentally broken idea. I have worked very hard to make it work in my games so as not to sacrifice the game mechanics which rely on it but I cannot even conceive of how one could actually measure whether one's characters were living up to the conduct requirements of an alignment.

I cannot see a strong link between alignment and conduct. Other variables can simply overwhelm alignment in such theories. For instance, would a Lawful Good Protestant make the same ethical calculations a Lawful Good Catholic would? How about a Lawful Good Taoist? Or a Lawful Good Stoic?

If there exists a duly constituted government that is doing something bad to a minority, how useful can alignment be in determining whether or how to oppose such behaviour?

I'm afraid I just don't see it. If your characters actually have philosophies of life or are part of religions or other organizations in your world, these things are far more important than alignment in determining what course of action would be congruent with a character's ethics.

While there are always cases of parties doing clearly, objectively evil things, for which there should be consequences, I would have difficulty in making any judgements about which of the 6 non-evil alignments a character is following at any given moment.

Also, I have a mechanical concern with DMs changing alignments after characters do something. This ends up sapping free will because it posits that a character is good at the moment that he does a thing that makes him evil and evil at the moment he does a thing that makes him good.

 

[AmerginLiath]

Try talking to them -- they may just not understand how certain actions fall or interpret things differently than you do.

I find many DM problems brought up on these boards can be solved without elaborate plans by merely DISCUSSING them with the players.

Oh, and the 'gestapo-lite' ideas suck in my opinon -- some DMs need to understand its a GAME -- players are supposed to have fun too...