Alignment alternatives for non-fantasy settings

[Fragsie]

Hey everyone, a while back in the development of my homebrew sci-fantasy setting I hit the little conundrum of what to do with alignment, specifically whether it had a place in my setting or not. Then when I decided that it did, how to go about implementing it, and what it should say about a character.

The decision that I definitely did want alignment in Spirit probably had a lot to do with the 'fantasy' part of the sci-fantasy setting. The game postulates that after exposure to certain ancient alien artefacts, an intelligent species observes that true belief begins to have markable effect upon reality (i.e. divine magic) and believers are able to realise their prayers upon the physical world in ways that science is unable to fully explain. This happens on a backdrop of an intergalactic community that spans roughly a quarter of the milky way, a feat achievable through the advancement of technology and logic; almost diametrically opposed to the sudden realisation that 'Gods' could be real and give their faithful powers beyond the realms of physics! These two ideals almost feel like they serve a similar cultural influence upon a race or individual as Law and Chaos would in a fantasy setting.

This got me thinking about what could replace Good and Evil... Such blanket assumptions of pure morality don't really have a place in a good sci-fi setting (IMHO) where questions of morality should be at the forefront, and more often than not looking at how morality itself is different from culture to culture. What is viewed as 'Evil' by one alien species could seem 'Good' to another. So I thought instead about the reasons and ways in which a species could have advanced enough to set out into the stars, was it because they have decimated their homeworld's resources and need more to fuel their ever growing technology. Or was it after they had developed beyond the need for limited fossil fuels and harmonised with their planet before looking curiously outward.

In the end I have ended up with an alignment system that goes from Technology to Ecology and from Faith to Logic. So a Celebrant or Zealot (cleric or divine warlock) that follows a nature based religion would have an Eco-Faith alignment, whereas an Machina Augmented (warrior type who uses cybernetic implants and nanobots) would most likely have a Tech-Logic alignment.



I did have a toy about with other systems of alignment such as the sliding scales of virtues/vices used in Pendragon, but decided against that in the end because i didn't want to make my setting too clunky for the players to upkeep.

Have any of you out there made your own alignment systems, or come across alternatives that you feel are superior to D&D's cross axis system?

 

[Quickleaf]

https://rpgcharacters.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/alternate-alignments/ for a funny yet also insightful take.
http://www.giantitp.com/forums/show...te-Alignment-System-the-Color-Wheel-P-E-A-C-H for Magic: the Gathering based 5 color alignments.
http://easydamus.com/alignmentreal.html for attempting to ascribe real-world philosophies / moral archetypes to traditional D&D alignments.

 

[Macv12]

This is a really interesting idea. But, I feel like the two axes overlap a bit too much; Tech-Logic makes sense, but it seems like a stretch that there would be as many Eco-Logic and Tech-Faith aligned people as Eco-Faith and Tech-Logic.

It occurs to me that if this phenomenon actually happened, and it was predictable and reproducible, it would be part of science. We wouldn't understand exactly how it works, but we would know THAT it works, and could set about trying to figure it out. But I think the Faith/Logic axis still works if you frame it a certain way: people who think this "miraculous" phenomenon is proof of god(s), versus people who think it will eventually be explained by science.

This framing means you could have Logic-oriented people who still make use of these artifacts, but use them to realize more "mundane" beliefs, instead of beliefs that a certain god will answer a certain prayer. And you might have people who believe that it's all divine, but the gods never meant it to be abused like this, and we're heading for Judgment if we don't turn humble again.

Your description of the Eco/Tech divide also makes me want to give those alignments different names. Maybe Expansion/Preservation, or something like that. Expansion-oriented people generally see the number of stars/planets as effectively numberless, so we should keep exploring and growing; this may be expressed as relentless conquering, uplifting primitive species, and religious evangelism (especially to newly-discovered species). Preservation-oriented people generally want to preserve resources; may be expressed as environmentalism, aversion to weapons, aversion to new technologies that might have high costs (like antimatter engines that are dangerous if they malfunction, and can be used as weapons, for example), non-intervention in low-tech cultures, and so on.

Quick examples:
- Logic/Expansion: wants to discover everything about the universe, get resources, find new species; no problem using artifacts
- Logic/Preservation: wants to let new cultures develop, increasing diversity; values the ecology and culture of each planet; doesn't trust the artifacts and thinks they should be studied before use
- Faith/Expansion: wants to spread the word of the true god
- Faith/Preservation: wants to remain humble and connected to their god's message, eschews technology

 

[Fragsie]

First of all, thank you for an awesome, in depth response.

This is a really interesting idea. But, I feel like the two axes overlap a bit too much; Tech-Logic makes sense, but it seems like a stretch that there would be as many Eco-Logic and Tech-Faith aligned people as Eco-Faith and Tech-Logic.

I can see how there could be overlap, but I don't think it's too big of a deal because that overlap disappears if you use an opposite alignment. On explanation of good-evil and chaos-law, an newbie d&d player could say the same about chaos and evil until you go into more depth.

As for your examples; I can see where you're coming from, but you've come to that conclusion without much knowledge of the setting. There are religions out there that wholeheartedly support the use of technology; religions and cults on an interstellar scale could have their churches or temples in cyberspace, hosting massive congregations from all over the galaxy. There could also be religions that worship A.I.s or that seek to glimpse a peek of the divine through the use of technology (e.g. building a gateway to heaven), or advancement to a higher state through technological means (e.g. uploading ones conciousness to the Grid), there are even religions that worship machine-gods like the techpriests of Mars in WH40k. All of these examples would be reasons to have a Tech-Faith alignment.

As for Eco-Logic, i think the most obvious example here would be a doctor or xenobiologist, or in fact any character with an interest in natural sciences. Also a character that has strong ecological views need not be religious, they may have (quite rightly) come to the logical conclusion that too much interference with a planet's ecology can greatly impact the development and even survival of it's flora and fauna, this alignment would be upheld by most starfleet officers in Star Trek's Federation (in principle at least). There is a character in the game I'm currently running who is an Augmented (Splicer) with an Eco-Logic alignment; he regularly undergoes gene-therapies and other genetic shenanigans in order to enhance his body and mind, he views this as the next logical step in evolution - taking control of ones own biology.

It occurs to me that if this phenomenon actually happened, and it was predictable and reproducible, it would be part of science. We wouldn't understand exactly how it works, but we would know THAT it works, and could set about trying to figure it out. But I think the Faith/Logic axis still works if you frame it a certain way: people who think this "miraculous" phenomenon is proof of god(s), versus people who think it will eventually be explained by science.

This framing means you could have Logic-oriented people who still make use of these artifacts, but use them to realize more "mundane" beliefs, instead of beliefs that a certain god will answer a certain prayer. And you might have people who believe that it's all divine, but the gods never meant it to be abused like this, and we're heading for Judgment if we don't turn humble again.

You're spot on with this, there are indeed many in the galaxy that believe that this 'magic' is simply a new field of science that has only just begun to be explored, but it has also meant that purporters of religions can be much more persuasive when they can cast 'spells'

I should probably give a little explanation for the so-called artifacts:
[sblock=SSA's]

Any species that ventures out into the galaxy will eventually come across a sub-space intersection artefact; what most people know as a Monolith. These mysterious massive spheres defy explanation; their surfaces are impenetrable by any sensors and seem to be invulnerable to any damage. Bafflingly they produce no gravity well and are similarly unaffected by external gravity fields. Although their workings are inexplicable, their functions (some of them at least) are known:

* Together they form a vast galactic subspace network, huge amounts of data can transmit near-instantly from one Monolith to another anywhere in the galaxy.
* They are static points in space relative to one another; there is no drift between them (though there is stella drift between them and nearby stars) and any external attempts to change their position have failed. This means that they can be used as a constant in the calculations necessary for safe warp travel without the skills of a Navigator (psion). There is a correlation between a species' speed of expansion and dominance of local space and the proximity of an SSA to their homeworld.
* There is a chronological link; albeit unexplained, between a species' first contact with an SSA and the emergence of Unknown Inferred Causation Disruption (UICD) or 'divine magic', within their population.

Despite the lack of knowledge concerning these artfacts, any species can see the advantage they offer.

Over the last millennia hundreds of races have utilised the Monoliths; integrating their planetary networks into the sub-space Grid they maintain, creating a galactic super-speed internet. [/sblock]

Your description of the Eco/Tech divide also makes me want to give those alignments different names. Maybe Expansion/Preservation, or something like that. Expansion-oriented people generally see the number of stars/planets as effectively numberless, so we should keep exploring and growing; this may be expressed as relentless conquering, uplifting primitive species, and religious evangelism (especially to newly-discovered species). Preservation-oriented people generally want to preserve resources; may be expressed as environmentalism, aversion to weapons, aversion to new technologies that might have high costs (like antimatter engines that are dangerous if they malfunction, and can be used as weapons, for example), non-intervention in low-tech cultures, and so on.

Your suggestion definitely has merit, though I feel it has a much bigger scope than perhaps would actually impact an individual character's choices and decisions regularly. But I see it working on a planetary or empire-wide scale, you've inspired me to perhaps create another or more complex alignment system for use in describing organisations within the setting using Expansion-Preservation. The initial description I gave for the Tech-Eco divide was perhaps a bit simple, and only one example of how it could be used, do you still feel the same after my further insights to the setting?

 

[Macv12]

First of all, thank you for an awesome, in depth response.

Hey, you inspired it. Alignment can be fascinating to discuss if someone has some really quality thoughts about how to approach it.

(...) All of these examples would be reasons to have a Tech-Faith alignment.

Interesting. I think the problem I'm having is just the term "Tech." It's actually pretty hard to make yourself truly believe something, which a faithless person would have to do to make these artifacts behave exactly as they wanted them to, while someone who already had strong religious faith when they approached the artifacts should be able to use them intuitively. It just seems strange that very many Faith-based people would go to the trouble of pursuing technology when they have these things that can actualize their faith claims directly. So just on its face, Tech-Faith seems pretty niche to me. But given that you juxtapose Tech with "Eco," that changes the implications, so it's probably just my problem with the terminology.

As for Eco-Logic, i think the most obvious example here would be a doctor or xenobiologist, or in fact any character with an interest in natural sciences. Also a character that has strong ecological views need not be religious (...) There is a character in the game I'm currently running who is an Augmented (Splicer) with an Eco-Logic alignment; he regularly undergoes gene-therapies and other genetic shenanigans in order to enhance his body and mind, he views this as the next logical step in evolution - taking control of ones own biology.

Granted on Eco-Logic, I was just thinking in the wrong terms before. That's pretty much what I was trying to get at with "Logic-Preservation."

The Splicer thing still sounds like something that could equally be described as "Eco" (enhancing oneself instead of relying on tools) or Tech (only possible with very high technology).

I should probably give a little explanation for the so-called artifacts:

I won't quote the whole thing, but this is fascinating stuff. Is it right to guess you've played some Mass Effect?

Your suggestion definitely has merit, though I feel it has a much bigger scope than perhaps would actually impact an individual character's choices and decisions regularly. But I see it working on a planetary or empire-wide scale, you've inspired me to perhaps create another or more complex alignment system for use in describing organisations within the setting using Expansion-Preservation.

You could shift the alignments I described a bit to get, essentially, "progressive" and "conservative," without the politics. New tech and gene splicing would both be "progressive," or whatever you'd call that (expansion, tech, etc), while preserving the human (or other) race in it's "true" state would be "conservative" (/preservation/eco). But OTOH, that may not be an interesting dichotomy.

Of course, techno-religions and splicer communities and such give your world a really cool aesthetic, so in that sense, I think you have a good system already.

As far as changing the term "Tech"...you might also frame it as "artifice" versus "nature." Maybe it's not much of a difference, but to me, it would make more sense for some Faith groups to advocate "works" and creating things to glorify the divine (glorious temples in older times, technology now), and others to advocate against profaning the world the divine already created, rather than to have Faith groups associated with "technology" per se. And this illustrates the difference between cyborg limbs and genetic splicing more clearly, to me.


Man I love this thread. I'm going to be thinking about this for hours.

 

[The M'hael]

https://rpgcharacters.wordpress.com/2011/06/27/alternate-alignments/ for a funny yet also insightful take.

I would add the Kinky-Vanilla axis, my friends would love this

 

[Fragsie]

Hey, sorry I took so long to reply to this.

Hey, you inspired it. Alignment can be fascinating to discuss if someone has some really quality thoughts about how to approach it.

aww shucks!

Interesting. I think the problem I'm having is just the term "Tech." ...so it's probably just my problem with the terminology.

I get that, and I'm not against rethinking the terminology, I've hit snags so far where I've wanted to use 'tech' or 'technology' elsewhere in the setting but have avoided doing so in order to avoid confusing things with alignment. But at the same time I need whatever word I use to be an easily understood concept from just that one word, and not have players having to read up on exactly what is meant by that alignment option.

The Splicer thing still sounds like something that could equally be described as "Eco" (enhancing oneself instead of relying on tools) or Tech (only possible with very high technology).

Granted; biotech is still tech, though this setting is set in the far future, and I feel that many cultures could have advanced through stages of industrial technology to get to a point where they could then eschew those techs in favour of more 'greener' options that become available. The alignment needs to state the characters current views and outlook rather than look at the history of what made those views viable.

I won't quote the whole thing, but this is fascinating stuff. Is it right to guess you've played some Mass Effect?

I have, but a lot of this setting was created before the release of those games, I would say that it's more influenced by Babylon 5 with a smattering of final fantasy.

You could shift the alignments I described a bit to get, essentially, "progressive" and "conservative," without the politics. New tech and gene splicing would both be "progressive," or whatever you'd call that (expansion, tech, etc), while preserving the human (or other) race in it's "true" state would be "conservative" (/preservation/eco). But OTOH, that may not be an interesting dichotomy.

This is cool, but i wonder how many players would still make this choice being influenced by the 'political' sound of those words (again it comes down to terminology), especially here in the UK where 'the Conservatives' are one of our two main political parties.

Of course, techno-religions and splicer communities and such give your world a really cool aesthetic, so in that sense, I think you have a good system already.

Thanks . Aesthetic is probably what most draws people into a setting, so that is a massive compliment.

As far as changing the term "Tech"...you might also frame it as "artifice" versus "nature." Maybe it's not much of a difference, but to me, it would make more sense for some Faith groups to advocate "works" and creating things to glorify the divine (glorious temples in older times, technology now), and others to advocate against profaning the world the divine already created, rather than to have Faith groups associated with "technology" per se. And this illustrates the difference between cyborg limbs and genetic splicing more clearly, to me.

Nature is almost an exact fit, but I worry that we're duplicating the concept with the Nature skill. Artifice still doesn't sit right with me though. There are alien psions in the setting that use their powers to influence the growth of stone/crystal/plants etc into functioal buildings and such. In fact the species' capital on the homeworld is almost exclusively constructed in this way; including massive space port, temples and palaces, how is this not 'artifice'?