Alignment System

[The Human Target]

Well to be fair, those same divinations are -really- not a good yardstick.

Check it out ~

Aura Strength (Faint):
* Undead: up to 2 HD (regardless of creature's actual alignment, you'll note).
* Evil Outsider: up to 1 HD.
* Cleric of an evil deity, or Blackguard: up to 1 HD.
* Evil Spell or Magic Item: up to caster level 2.
* Evil Creature: up to 10 HD.

Aura Strength (Moderate):
* Undead: 3-8 HD.
* Evil Outsider: 2-4 HD.
* Cleric of an evil deity, or Blackguard: 2-4 HD.
* Evil Spell or Magic Item: caster level 3-8.
* Evil Creature: 11-25 HD.

Etc, etc.

The blackest-hearted assassin, foulest, most murderous tainted soul on earth pings as evil as the lowest Altar Boy of Vecna, unless he's got more than 10 levels under his belt. And then, he'll ping somewhere on the same level as an accolyte or a lemure all the way up to his forays into epic levels.

And, moreso, Blacksoul the Scourge of Innocence shows at the same level of evil as, say.. Bill the Greedy Moneylender (Scourge of Exchange Rates).

Plenty of room to work with.

However, if that's not your bag, you can always do what I used to: Detect X Alignment spells only work on supernatural examples of said alignment. So you can tell if Johnny the Homicidal Maniac is possessed by a demon, or if that dretch isn't just some kind of really fat midget with a funny hat on, but you can't tell if Brother Suldim is a corrupt priest or if that man in the corner is thinking mean thoughts about kicking puppies.

Yeah, I appreciate the breakdown. But, its still a problem. For me anyway.

You actually highlighted yet another problem. That its so hard to determine the "level" of the evil/good/chaos/law. So

Its not a question of how evil/good/chaos/law someone detects, but that they detect at all. It removes tension. It creates problems of in game logic (why aren't evil people killed, or banished, or ostracized.) How can an innocent man ever go punished? Or a guilty man go free?

It just creates a very unEarth-like setting.

(And I'll admit, its less of a huge problem in settings with few PC classed individuals. But it still results in problems for me.)

 

[Sejs]

Its not a question of how evil/good/chaos/law someone detects, but that they detect at all. It removes tension. It creates problems of in game logic (why aren't evil people killed, or banished, or ostracized.) How can an innocent man ever go punished? Or a guilty man go free?

Well the issue there is that alignment and guilt arn't necessarily related. Good roughly equates to altruism, evil to selfishness. But just because you ping as either doesn't mean you've necessarily done anything. You can be evil just by means of being a self-centered dick. That doesn't mean you should be killed, banished or ostracized, and it doesn't mean you're automatically guilty of any crimes you're accused of. Add to the fact that most people are morally Neutral and it gets even more complicated.

 

[Aaron L]

And what did the Guals detect? Romans weren't very humane to non-Romans.

I get what you are saying that there is a difference between how people in the game view someone and universe views that person. However as others have mentioned actions are what matters in the alignment system. The alignment system has become a tally board where 'evil' actions against the Guals would need to be weighed against the 'good' actions at home to get that neutral alignment. Since it is actions, wouldn't a Roman detect as evil if he'd just sacked (raped, killed, pillaged) a Gual village...or has he somehow balanced out all these bad actions already per fate...

I think alignment is really only an issue when there are detect spells /abilities. I think if the detect spells/ability were done away with then the alignment issue is moot.

Detect spells would be silly too for Romans vs Guals....so what if either registered as good...they still would have been treated the same.

I'm just glad there isn't a detect class spell/ability. I think paladins would hunt rogues...

The point I was trying to make is that the Roman who went out pillaging and raping isn't Good, even if he's otherwise perfectly courteous and nice at home in Rome. And he isn't Evil because he's doing what he's supposed to do as a soldier. (although with the raping and whatnot I would imagine him becoming Evil fairly quickly if he does it very often.) He doesn't change alignments when he gets home just because he's with his family and friends and being a nice guy (well, he could change eventually, but not back and fourth depending on what he plans to do that day) He's Neutral. Good people don't pillage or rape or murder people very often, even if they happen to be their enemies, and if you do it as a matter of course than you aren't Good, no matter how nice you act at home to your friends.

 

[buzz]

But just because you ping as either doesn't mean you've necessarily done anything. You can be evil just by means of being a self-centered dick.

No, a PC absolutely cannot. If the PC has never done Evil, the PC is not Evil alignment. Alignment is a descriptor of a PC's habitual actions. They may not be guilty of the crime you're trying to solve, but they're guilty of something. Murder, most likely, as Evil means the PC "debase or destroy innocent life."

Again, this is exactly what KM and I were talking about. You're not describing any kind of alignment defined by the actual text.

 

[buzz]

To be fair, I do think you're reading into my original post.

Ah, okay. When you said "shoe-horn," I assumed you were seeing alignment as some sort of behavioral restriction, which is really ain't no mo'. My apologies.

 

[The Human Target]

Well the issue there is that alignment and guilt arn't necessarily related. Good roughly equates to altruism, evil to selfishness. But just because you ping as either doesn't mean you've necessarily done anything. You can be evil just by means of being a self-centered dick. That doesn't mean you should be killed, banished or ostracized, and it doesn't mean you're automatically guilty of any crimes you're accused of. Add to the fact that most people are morally Neutral and it gets even more complicated.

Being "evil" means you've done something cosmically evil, and probably on a regular basis. You've preyed other people, one way or another.

So it does actually mean you've done something wrong, even if people can't specify what.

And I discern lies spell can pretty much nail you but to the wall after you detect as evil.

So yes, its still a horrible block in telling a story. And presenting a mystery. Or even suspense.

 

[AFGNCAAP]

Is the alignmnet system a good system(?)

I think it's good, but honestly, I think that the d20 Allegiances system is much better. At the very least, it allows for characters to be loyal to organizations & their ideals rather than having to somehow fot that into the 9-tier AL system.

And, in addition to that, the order in which allegiances are listed indicates importance (so rather than trying to determine if a paladin is more Lawful than Good or more Good than Lawful, it can be determined quickly by looking at the order allegiances are listed in [Law, Good for the former, and Good, Law for the latter]).

And, simple enough, a true Neutral character just wouldn't have any allegiances (or rather, any moral/ethical [i.e. Alignment]-based allegiances) listed on their character sheet.

should good and evil be based entirely on character perceptions?

Nope, not at all. Main reason why--good/evil/law/chaos are absolutes that exist, esp. with the presence of divine beings/outsiders who embody these elements. Eberron is an exception to the rule, but then again, Eberron could work just fine using the Allegiances system instead of AL, IMHO.

As it is, I really think that none of the base classes should have alignment requirements: I think that alignment requirements for a class be restricted to Prestige Classes (and, as such, have some classes solely as Prestige classes, like paladins, druids, berserking/raging barbarians, magical bards, magical rangers, etc.).

Then again, I think the core classes should be more generic & malleable, and Prestige Classes should have more focused flavors (such as thief, asssassin, knight, ninja, samurai, combat-OK cleric, druid, swashbuckler, paladin, raging barbarian, specialist mage, etc.). But that's just me.

 

[The Human Target]

I think it's good, but honestly, I think that the d20 Allegiances system is much better. At the very least, it allows for characters to be loyal to organizations & their ideals rather than having to somehow fot that into the 9-tier AL system.

And, in addition to that, the order in which allegiances are listed indicates importance (so rather than trying to determine if a paladin is more Lawful than Good or more Good than Lawful, it can be determined quickly by looking at the order allegiances are listed in [Law, Good for the former, and Good, Law for the latter]).

And, simple enough, a true Neutral character just wouldn't have any allegiances (or rather, any moral/ethical [i.e. Alignment]-based allegiances) listed on their character sheet.



Nope, not at all. Main reason why--good/evil/law/chaos are absolutes that exist, esp. with the presence of divine beings/outsiders who embody these elements. Eberron is an exception to the rule, but then again, Eberron could work just fine using the Allegiances system instead of AL, IMHO.

As it is, I really think that none of the base classes should have alignment requirements: I think that alignment requirements for a class be restricted to Prestige Classes (and, as such, have some classes solely as Prestige classes, like paladins, druids, berserking/raging barbarians, magical bards, magical rangers, etc.).

Then again, I think the core classes should be more generic & malleable, and Prestige Classes should have more focused flavors (such as thief, asssassin, knight, ninja, samurai, combat-OK cleric, druid, swashbuckler, paladin, raging barbarian, specialist mage, etc.). But that's just me.

Its not just you.

 

[Zogmo]

I think this post is a good example of exactly what Kamikaze Midget and I are talking about. No offense intended, GoodKingJayIII.

Exactly!

 

[buzz]

So yes, its still a horrible block in telling a story. And presenting a mystery. Or even suspense.

It just means you need to get creative.