Alignment and politics question

[Neumannium]

Hi all,

I've been DMing for my current group now for about 4 years...we were playing 3.0, and have fully switched to 3.5.

I use all of my own campaign materials, borrowing heavily from other campaigns (the FRCS, Dragon articles, Diamond Throne, etc).

My PCs are very, very, very much powergamers. All they want is combat and loot. I used to be able to weave some kind of story together, but now if I even start to do that they get annoyed. It's to the point that when they don't know what to do, they ask me "Which way is the biggest treasure/monster?"

While occasionally this can be somewhat fun, I'm finding myself bored to tears. The odd thing is, I don't think that they are really enjoying themselves either, they're just addicted to the intoxicating draught that is 'loot'.

Ok, let me get to the point...

I've been working on another world, and I don't expect to finish it until this Winter (or later). I'm trying to create a world that will be more fun for me to play in, and I'm hoping that by me enjoying running the game, it will make it more fun for the PCs.

After looking at some of Monte Cook's work with Arcana Unearthed and the Diamond Throne, I realize I want to drop alignment. Alignment in our game is nothing but a straight jacket. My question is, how do you do this effectively? What happens to all the 'detect' spells, and 'magic circle against' spells? Do you just dump them?

I also am trying to create a world based on the Feudal system (thank you Magical Medieval Society!) and I want the PCs to have to experience some intrigue and politics. I also want things like Undead to be incredibly scary. To do this, I'm thinking about eliminating the Cleric class and mellowing the Paladin class to be more of a Knight class -- that is, honorable fighter without the religious aspect. Basically, turning undead doesn't exist.

Has anyone done this, and how did it work? Also, any tips you have to make this not totally unbalance the campaign would be great.

In summary:

If anyone could let me know about removing alignment and how it affects the game, including spells, damage reduction, etc...

And, I want to create a intrigue/political game and have never run such a campaign, so any help there would be great.

And, any tips on removing turning undead and eliminating the Cleric class? I think I'd still allow Paladins to cast spells (and Druids and Bards) for healing, but I really don't want the Pallys to 'smite evil' and turn.

Thanks in advance for your advice!

 

[Bendris Noulg]

Alignment in our game is nothing but a straight jacket.

Then you're implementing it wrong. Alignment should be a summary of past actions, not a dictation of future ones.

 

[Neumannium]

I know that, but my players do not...

It happens at least once every gaming session where one PC will have to decide something and it will come down to "Well, I'm 'good' so I wouldn't retreat and leave my friends behind."

I have no problem with using the alignment as a guide, but it's to the point in the game where the PCs are using it as a crutch, and not thinking for themselves.

I take it from your post that you don't think I should drop alignment?

That's a valid suggestion, too -- I just hadn't really thought of it. If that's the case then can you give me good ways to run the campaign using alignments, so I don't feel like the PCs are restricted...

Thanks,

 

[hong]

I know that, but my players do not...

It happens at least once every gaming session where one PC will have to decide something and it will come down to "Well, I'm 'good' so I wouldn't retreat and leave my friends behind."

That's fine. Think of it as shorthand for "I'm the sort of guy who wouldn't retreat and leave my friends behind, that's why I have good on my character sheet". It's when you get to situations like "I'm chaotic neutral, so I'll lie and cheat and steal whenever I please" that you have problems.

Re your original post, try playing something other than D&D for a few months. Your guys sound like they need a bigger break than just changing a campaign world will provide.

 

[CalrinAlshaw]

Use a scaling system of Evil----Good same for chaos and law. 0, 0 being Neutral. Tell them to give you their characters alignment at the beginning of the game, then simply tell them act as you think your character would, don't worry about alignment.

Whenever a say...lawful (10) character does something pretty chaotic, or uncharacteristicly spontaneous, drop him a point, if he can hold onto his lawfulness a full session move-em back up. But don't tell the players unless they have some sort of magic to "know" another char's alignment.

Anyhow, if you are going to drop the Paladin's ability to turn undead AND smite evil/detect evil i'd give them some boost, for example, let the paladin gain a bonus to sense-motive skill checks when interrogating. As for smite evil, simply give them "smite". And you need add nothing else, since the smite anything is powerful enough to count as the fill-in for Turn Undead.

If you are worried about clerics and turning undead, simply take the ability away and give them something else. Maybe give them a paladin's Divine Grace so they have a reason to put points into Charisma or something, after all, the healer of the group should ALWAYS be the most protected.

Calrin Alshaw

 

[Bendris Noulg]

I take it from your post that you don't think I should drop alignment?

Actually, no. I just feel you should drop it for the right reasons. To which, if it's hindering to players (some or all), I likely wouldn't drop it at all if doing so would cause me more headaches as the GM. On the other hand, I could see replacing it (Honor, Taint, some other system), but that may or may not effect the issue.

 

[SableWyvern]

I agree with Hong, in that your best option might be to try another system entirely, which will quite possibly help invigorate things. Importantly, it will make it much easier to drop some of the kill/loot baggage that you and/or your players might associate with d20.

An intermediate step would be to try another d20 system. From what I've heard of Conan, it might be just what you're looking for -- scary undead, emphasis shifted away from cool lewt etc..

 

[Pbartender]

I've found that the easiest way to remove alignment, is to not remove it entirely.

So, here's what we're going to do... Most mortals don't have alignments, per se, they're a mish mash of every possibility. Everyone is essentially neutral with slight leanings in one direction or another based on personality and upbringing. In other words, play your character's personality, and forget about alignment.

Certain extraordinary creatures, however, have the capability of being purely Good, Evil, Lawful or Chaotic. Only creatures that have alignment-based subtypes are affected by alignment-based spells and effects. A protection from evil spell, for example, would give AC and save bonuses against demons and devils, but not against your average goblin or kobold.

Certain classes and PrCs, of course, can give chracters an appropriate subtype. For example, paladins would gain the Good subtype, Monks would gain the Lawful subtype, and Blackguards would gain the Evil subtype.

This would reduce the value of certain magic item abilities... But that's a very small consideration, and has a very small effect on the game.

 

[Keeper of Secrets]

Hmmm. In my opinion, removing alignment could be one of the best steps you could take. I always felt that alignment was kind of silly in the greater scheme of things and D&D is one of the few games that actually has an alignment system so spelled out.

If you kept the characters to 'good-natured' and 'bad natured' I think you would be getting so much more freedom out of your game. I guess my biggest gripe with alignment has been the idea that it sometimes makes playing more complicated characters hard to put together.

For instance, was Nixon evil? Was Nixon good? What about the Pope? What about some of the more sinister Popes? What about ruthless freedom fighters who are willing to kill for liberty? I don't want things to get TOO deep but the very idea that D&D has a set number of alignments, by its very nature restricts anything that is NOT one of those alignments.

 

[scourger]

a different campaign style

It sounds as if you want a different camapign style altogether. You want to get away from the hack & slash, kill a monster & take its treasure. The way to make this fun for your players is to reward non-combat choices. You have to give them the option to solve a problem and be rewarded without combat. Of course, they may still choose to fight; but it will be inherently more risky.

This style is difficult to DM. I've not been able to eliminate combat completely. I do not think that would be a good game. There should be action at least every other session. Here are some things I have done to reward non-combat choices.

I have given out maps & information based on Knowledge skills. Any character benefits from physical skills (i.e. Jump, Climb, Hide), but the only way the CHARACTER knows anything about the campaign world is through Knowledge skills. This technique works especially well if the campaign world is unique (something you create) or unknown (the players haven't been exposed to it in some way). And, you can give different information to different players so that they have to share information. The players have to have some basic information about the world, but you can keep them from drawing on prior game experience for information. Remember, most D&D world don't have satellites, TV, radio or even newspapers. There certainly isn't public education. The PCs really don't know much about the world unless they spend skill points in Knowledge skills (or choose the bard class).

I have given out blue chips for heroic actions consistent with the camapign flavor I wanted to present and red chips for actions inconsistent with the campaign flavor. Since each blue chip was +5% xp and each red chip was -5% xp, this worked VERY well. Soon, no red chips were necessary, and I gave 4 blue chips in one night to one player. An xp bonus will get the attention of your power gamers. So, if you want them to use Diplomacy; then give a blue chip for attempting a diplomatic soultion first and a red chip for jumping straight to the sword.

I have also awarded xp bonuses for Craft & Profession skills. If the campaign is established correctly, the PCs may have a Craft or Profession in common that is central to the campaign. In my case, they were pirates; so Craft (shipwright) and Profession (sailor) were important. The first session, I gave the players a roll on each skill for x100 xp because they needed to repair and sail a ship they had just captured (they started at 3rd level). I am using just Profession (sailor) now, but the skill remains important since they roll every session for bonus xp, which represents how good they are at being a pirate. Sure, any fighter can pick up a cutlass; but only a professional really succeeds to a position of prominence.

I don't have any real help for you vis-a-vis removing alignment from D&D. The games without alignment that I have played & DMed recently have been non-fantasy d20 variants in which alignment is not a really a factor. This presents such a fundamental change to the game that I don't think I would do it. It doesn't sound as if alignment is the real change you want to make in your game. But, it could be done as others have suggested.

Perhaps instead of turning, you could make the channeling of that positive energy damaging to undead. Just make it a ranged touch attack using the existing mechanic to level drain the undead foe (i.e., instead of turning X hit dice, the target loses X (or 1/2 X) levels). It's probably a reasonable substitute for clerics, and could still work in reverse to bolster undead with extra temporary hit dice. You could also achieve a similar effect by replacing Turn Undead with a Smite Undead ability. It's really just a bonus to melee damage based on class level and Charisma. It's less pwoerful, but it's still good.