Alignment definition in my own campaign setting

Verequus

First Post
I'm creating a new campaign setting and work now on the basics. One thing, which is different to the "default setting", is the handling of the alignment. For the understanding a short description of the world creation:

At the beginning was nothing and everything at the same time. Out of that mixture two forces began to separate - Good and Evil. After both powers were fully developed, they recognized a deep hatred against each other and they began to battle. It didn't take long to notice, that both were equally strong, so no power could reach supremacy about the other or could even really hurt with the powerful weapons being used. Eventually Good decided: "If I can't destroy Evil and live afterwards, then I will destroy it with my life!" Thus Good formed out of its own essence a horrible weapon and hurled it at Evil. But instead to explode immediately, the weapon wrested Evil oh its essence and vanished in the space, where it eventually died as a supernova - and created a new universe.

Therefore is everywhere in the world the essences of Good and Evil, just in different amounts. And that's where my interpretation of the alignment issue begins. Normal races don't have really an alignment like in the core rules, only the expression of their tendencies. Only beings and races with a lot of essence have an alignment - it is possible to gain essence through the use of the Soul Ore, the materialised essence of the powers (I don't like the name Soul Ore - has someone a better suggestion?). The detectable alignment is the result of the judgement after the morality of the powers themselves, not after the personal moralities of individuals. My goal is it to have definitions for the powers moralities, which are commonly known, but still allow a possible misinterpretation, why someone is marked as neutral, good or evil. Look at the next design notes for a more detailed example:

Normal people have just enough divine essence, so that detection spells will show only a faint aura of good, neutral or evil - the lawful-chaotic-axis can't be seen. This faint aura depends solely on the perception of the Greater Powers, so it is entirely possible, that someone has an evil aura, because his morality isn't aligned with the Good Power (e.g. the thinking, that goblin kids can be killed, because they will kill as adults, can make an otherwise good-hearted man look like a simple murderer). The aura has for people with few divine essence always the same strength, regardless if the scanned person is a psychopathic mass murderer or a single, old, bitter woman, whose only delight is making the lifes of her neighbours miserable.

Check if someone with alignment wants to do something out of alignment, except persons, who have a 50/50 mixture of Good/Evil, have a free will. The Greater Powers mark people because these have either the same morality or haven't a morality which is aligned enough with one of the Greater Powers - in the latter case something must be considered by a marked person as allowed which is directly opposed with one of the Powers views. The lawful-chaotic-axis is always one step in strength below the good-evil-axis and is simply considered as a mark for knowing the general tendencies.


So, what could be the definitions of the powers behaviour? The Good power having a strict paladin morality?
 

log in or register to remove this ad

If law and chaos aren't really factors then I'd have thought the Powers would have more of a NG/NE style to them.

Are you really suggesting that PCs with an alignment would have restricted free will?
 

I've been toying with the idea of an ultimately relative alignment - If a jealous Evil or Chaotic (or both) deity destroyed the world, and created a new one in it's own image - then the few surviving Celestials or good-aligned mortals would seek to destroy it - creating reversed Good/Evil and Lawful/Chaotic alignment axises.
 

CCamfield said:
If law and chaos aren't really factors then I'd have thought the Powers would have more of a NG/NE style to them.
Yes, that is reasonable. I will put some thoughts into it.

CCamfield said:
Are you really suggesting that PCs with an alignment would have restricted free will?
Yes. Having an alignment is like having a code of conduct, like the ones the paladin has. A paladin has the choice between following and losing his powers. The decision, if one wants to have essence or not, is the same, if one wants to play a paladin - you have to follow some rules, which other don't, but you get some advantages. How that is solved, I'm unsure - with the checks or simple judgement.

I think, it is like in Arcana Unearthed, where one can choose to be Unbound or not - the main difference next to the effect is, that the decision can changed or even reversed through outer circumstances. Everyone without alignment is nearly 100% protected against alignment effects (except the detection, but that I could change to a check) - no banishment, no Word of Law or other spells do anything against normal people. The price is that one can't use alignment effects themselves, except through magic items.

If one has alignment, then he can get effects like the bloodlines in the Birthright setting. Someone with both Good and Evil has only neutral effects like slower aging (up to immortality) or powering his spells or attacks - this is the price for free will with alignment, while someone with only one kind of essence gets some extras - I think, BoED and its counterpart BoVD will be useful for ideas.

So, what do you think?

Robbert Raets said:
I've been toying with the idea of an ultimately relative alignment - If a jealous Evil or Chaotic (or both) deity destroyed the world, and created a new one in it's own image - then the few surviving Celestials or good-aligned mortals would seek to destroy it - creating reversed Good/Evil and Lawful/Chaotic alignment axises.
Interesting, but would that really function, if someone of CE alignment would be CG in your world? His behaviour wouldn't change, so the relabeling would be more confusing, wouldn't it?
 

RuleMaster said:
Interesting, but would that really function, if someone of CE alignment would be CG in your world? His behaviour wouldn't change, so the relabeling would be more confusing, wouldn't it?
Actually, CE would become LG. But the change in behaviour is due to the way everyone that survived the apocalypse (and that can't be more than a handful of beings) percieves the world. It'll be the creation of the one who destroyed the previous one. It's doubtful that they'll be very forgiving towards the 'usurpers', even if those are LG creatures.
 

Remove ads

Top