Alignment issues

[EP]

Also, alignment shouldn't be changed from just one event. Unless it's a really drastic event, like destroying an orphanage, or betraying one's evil master to save the world from his maniacal plot, or......um, whatever Lawful or Chaotic acts would be appropriately significant as to change a character's alignment suddenly.

Agreed and therein possibly lies the difficulty you're having with alignment at the moment. One act alone does not suddenly turn a character evil, especially when their original alignment was lawful neutral, which can be argued to be the alignment that says "I do what I must to protect others." If the character believed that he was justified in using torture to obtain information that would help others and didn't seem to be enjoying the process (plus the target was incredibly stubborn and standard interogation tactics weren't working), then it seems a sudden jump to move to an evil character.

The problem with such an alignment change is that it does have a minor impact on the game. If a character in the party casts detect evil, then this guy'll light up. Protection from evil will actually hinder the character and prevent him from working with the party in battle. Not huge things, no, but an effect nonetheless. Maybe if the character was allowed to keep his original alignment but others will treat him as if he were evil, someting like how dwarves are perceived by others races in some games (specifically 1E D&D with Charisma modifiers for other race characters). If he wants to remove this stigma against him, he'll have to do something remarkably good to put him back in good standing with others. So he doesn't show up as evil to a spell, but still feels the heat for his actions.

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Ever since then, however, alignment has come up in discussion at least once every 2-3 games. Sometimes its a simple discussion, other times its a heated debate on whether or not a certain action is considered evil, or unlawful or both, or whatever. i try as a DM to tell the players in advance whether an action is considered evil in my book, but whenever I do, an arguement seems to always break out. The best I can do, it seems, is tell them what I consider is good or evil ahead of time, so that they know whats up. But, it always gets tension.

So I guess my question is, what do I do?

You've certainly done one of the most important things - to tell your players ahead of time what YOU consider to be correct regarding alignment. Now you just need to tell your players to shut the hell up and play along. This is D&D. It's roleplaying. It's a game. It's not Advanced Philosphy and Religion 301.

See also: http://home.earthlink.net/~duanevp/dnd/alignments.htm

If it's that consistent of a problem maybe you could tell the players that at the next game session you're going to discuss HOUSE alignment rulings with them once and for all. Let them provide their valuable input. Make any changes you think you should. Write up a document with detailed notes if it will help (see above link). Include your REASONS for ruling as you do on certain alignment issues as it will probably help players to go along with it even if they disagree with your interpretations.

Then tell them that as of NOW they are all going to agree to accept it. There are plenty of things that all players will disagree with in D&D for one reason or another but mid-game-session is not the time or place to play Immanuel Kant or Ayn Rand. In future let players object on alignment issues if they can be calm, reasonable and preferably concise, but if they're just going to argue tell them to take a hike for an hour so that the rest of the table doesn't have to listen to complaining wankers instead of playing D&D.

 

[Halivar]

I'm talking about breaking the fingers type of torture. So I ruled that his alignment would change from LN to LE.

As DM, that's your prerogative. However, if I was the player in question, and disagreed with you about the evilness of that particular action, I would continue to role-play a LN character regardless of what you put on my sheet.

IOW, if you force me to "change" my alignment, the most you can do is change a letter on my character sheet. You cannot, however, expect role-play from me consistent with what you put on my character sheet. This is especially true in instances where my character has been consistently good or neutral, and had perhaps only occasional dalliances with the "dark side." In those cases, the consistency of my goodness or neutrality will not change one iota, and there will simply be a disconnect between my stats on paper and my character in action; and I would leave resolving that inconsistency up to you, the DM.

BTW, was this a single, isolated instance? If so, can't the character just perform a single good act and get you to change it back to neutral or good?

 

[Man in the Funny Hat]

Some of the problem is I say hey I think thats an evil act. And another player will say, no thats more nuetral.

How do you act nuetral? what the heck is that all about?

That's about trying to run alignment backwards because actions determine alignment - your alignment doesn't MAKE you act neutral, good, or whatever. Alignment exists in the game to assist players in roleplaying their characters believably and consistently. Alignment is determined by looking at a characters behavior over time. It isn't redetermined with every freakin' act. Actions do not carry INHERENT alignment tags or else we'd have a nice long list of actions and what alignment you become if you perfom them. Actions must be taken in context and MUST involve a certain amount of understanding regarding motivation.

If my character kills someone is it evil or not? CONTEXT. MOTIVATION. This means there is great room for interpretation and different perceptions.

Alignments are naturally vague. Alignment isn't there to dictate your actions - it's there for a player to measure his characters ONGOING behavior against to ensure that his character continues to act believably and consistently. Actions that are NOT consistent with a characters chosen alignment doesn't mean that the character IS becoming a different alignment unless those actions are EXTREMELY contrary to current alignment or they are part of an ongoing pattern of behavioral change for the character.

Certainly for characters that don't have alignment restrictions on their behavior because of class or other demands it doesn't matter if one player thinks certain actions are more consistent with evil and another thinks they are neutral. The player of the character in question should simply continue to play his character as desired and let alignment sort ITSELF out by the characters long-term behavior.

Good-aligned characters will occasionally do bad, maybe even EVIL things. That doesn't mean that the character whipsaws to an Evil alignment and should start acting like a psychotic mass-murderer. Evil characters can occasionally do nice things without suddenly being considered paladins-in-training.

In games where alignment is an ongoing problem the bulk of the problems can be solved simply by beating into peoples heads that alignment is not the freakin' be-all end-all of the game. Just play your friggin' PC's and let alignment take care of itself. Quit obsessing over it and it instantly becomes less of an issue - which is as it should be.

BTW, neutral is just a position somewhere between extremes of alignment. If you're netural between Good and Evil that simply means that you're not behaving according to either extreme on a consistent basis.

 

[Cake Mage]

First off this is all great advice, thanks.

I should should have said that the character in question was role-playing very much like an evil bastard in the first place. The things he said, suggested and wanted to do were pretty bad. I believe I warned him, out of game, about it once, I think.

After the fact he has not tried to change his character persona. He has played him the same from day one, and plays him well to boot. The party doesn't mind that he's evil so much as he does his job. (they formed a guild and its all very business like)

For a little while in the most recent past however, he was acting a little more good, with the help of the concious cleric. So i spoke to him about changing his alignment back to neutral, but the weapon he was weilding, which was very much an evil magic item, would cause a level loss if he turned so he decided to keep the alignment as is.

I did have a talk with everyone and we seem to be on the same page a bit more. I am going to try and speak up a bit more when it comes to alignment changes, so they don't seem so sudden.