Beyond good and evil

[RobNJ]

Re: Re: Re: Beyond good and evil

To remove alignment and fix the rules broken as a result you can do several things:

Thanks, this is exactly the kind of thing I needed.

I'm curious what you do about the fact that upper level clerical spell lists would be decimated by this change? I've been thinking of including "Vs. Infidel" type effects; stuff that works against people whose creed you stand in opposition to.

 

[Mallus]

Can't live with them....

...don't have to live without them, anymore.

I think with 3rd edition, where alignments seems a lot more descriptive than proscriptive, my problems with the alignment system have pretty much disappeared. The biggest problem I had with the prior takes on alignment where that the mechanics of the game punished characters for personality/worldview changes, even if said changes made perfect sense in light of their experiences --I guess I'm thinking way back to 1st edition here.

A character could go from a farmboy to mighty Knight of the Realm, but never have a change of heart? I want my players to react as if they existed in a dynamic and living world.

So I use a the classic nine alignments. This does pose a problem in terms of aligned spells and such, but I like to deal with that on a case by case basis. A loose interpretation of the rules has worked so far...

Also, I'm more than a little puzzled by the comment implying Chaotic means one thinks the ends justify the means. I've always taken that as an aspect of Lawful {Neutral or Evil}. The classic example would be a police sate rights. The goal of maintaining a stable society outweigh the rights of individual citizens to express themsleves freely.

 

[RobNJ]

Re: Can't live with them....

I think with 3rd edition, where alignments seems a lot more descriptive than proscriptive, my problems with the alignment system have pretty much disappeared.

My problem is that mentality hasn't trickled down to everyone I play with just yet. A lot of them seem to very much have a proscriptive take on alignment. What they see on the sheet is how they act and anyone tries to stop them is in for a hell of a surprise. Since my players take role playing very seriously, this leads to horrible, bitter arguments (part of that is due to us having one very irritating player in the group) wherein your chaotic goods and your lawful goods are at each other's throats and screaming for blood.

I just started to get this idyllic, pastoral dream where players just were whatever character they wanted to be. I want to be a reckless hero who wants to write his name across the stars and isn't afraid to cut corners along the way to make sure that's so. I can adventure with a martial artist and a guy who creeps into the bedrooms of our king's enemies and kills them in their sleep. That sort of thing would happen quite often in books, but you'd almost never see it in a D&D campaign (now I'm sure I'm going to get a dozen counter examples).

I just want freedom. I mean, it's got to tell us something that not a single d20 product that I'm aware of other than Dungeons & Dragons (not even those produced by Wizards) has the alignment system.

 

[Desdichado]

Re: Re: Re: Beyond good and evil

Also sprach kenjib
To remove alignment and fix the rules broken as a result you can do several things:

1. Paladins have a code of honorable behavior based on religious canon. They fall from grace if they break this code.

2. Give monks a set of aesthetic taboos and rituals that they must follow to remain focused. They meditate three times a day. They can not eat meat. They must refrain from too many worldly possessions. If they do not follow this path then they can not advance any more levels in monk until they continue to do so.

3. Remove the alignment restriction for bards entirely.

And barbarians, don't forget. I really dislike how the barbarian has cultural "baggage" with it, when the class itself, removed from the cultural implications, works really well for any type of fighter that relies more on intuition and natural talent rather than training.

4. Make all spells based on good/evil work on specific types of creatures instead. Demons, devils, undead, and other supernatural horrors are evil. Celestials, unicorns, and some other traditionally "pure" supernatural creatures are good. Good and evil could be used as sub-types, like fire, cold, etc. I don't have my MM right now so I can't create a better list at the moment.

5. Remove all spells based on chaos/law.

This is something you have to be careful about. Changing some of this really lessens the effectiveness of some classes as they were originally written. Either you can 1) decide that over-riding balance isn't that big of a deal to you (and adjust encounters acccordingly), 2) replace those abilities/spells with something else that works in a similar way but doesn't use alignment per se, or 3) leave alignment in but just minimize it's importance to the game.

 

[Tonguez]

There would have to be some changes, of course. Detect Evil would have to be more like, "Detect Infidel," and the DM would have to decide whether the target would be a sinner in the eyes of the paladin/cleric/what have you.

Actually a reading of the Spell will show that NO such change is required AND that the Detect Evil etc spells DO NOT have anything to do with Alignment

what the Spell detects is

from the SRD
Evil creatures
Undead creature
Evil elementals
Evil magic items or spells
Evil outsiders
Clerics of an evil deity

So the Spell will not detect whether Bob the Builder is Neutral Evil unless Bob the Builder is also a Night Hag (ie a Creature with an EVIL subtype) or a Cleric of BadMojo

Anyway from that rant you may detect that I dislike Alignments and have dropped them entirely. Paladins still require a Code of COnduct (now clearly stated rather than just oh Lawful Good guy) and Monks must maintain their Discipline.
Everyone else is good and bad according to their actions and the perceptions of those around them.

 

[kenjib]

Good points about weakening the spells and paladin abilities. As regards clerics, would it be possible to supplement the spell list using d20 sources (like Green Ronin's pocket grimoire divine) to expand the spell list and lessen the reliance on such spells?

I'm not sure what to do about paladins. I like the idea of creating an "infidels" concept, and that could help.

 

[Mallus]

My problem is that mentality hasn't trickled down to everyone I play with just yet. A lot of them seem to very much have a proscriptive take on alignment. What they see on the sheet is how they act and anyone tries to stop them is in for a hell of a surprise. Since my players take role playing very seriously, this leads to horrible, bitter arguments (part of that is due to us having one very irritating player in the group) wherein your chaotic goods and your lawful goods are at each other's throats and screaming for blood.

Sorry to hear that... I've always felt that the DM bears a lot of the responsibility here. If you're going to allow players to create wildly different characters --in terms of aligment, race, social standing--- then you'd better be prepared to keep coming up with reasons why these individuals work together.

That said, I've also found that players over-rely on the abstract mechanism of alignment when trying to define characters, rather than on the more realistic, individual behaviors/beliefs that in toto make up alingment. While alignment is supposed to give players something to grab hold of, a basis for a personality, it does seem to be a end rather than a means to an end. Thus you get contentious, well-armed walking dogmas, rather than good characters.

Hope your group changes real-life alignment, or you find another.

OT: RobNJ --you wouldn't happen to be an RU student? I have many fond blurry memories of the Ale 'N Wych from my days, long ago, at Rutgers... And Fat Cats. They still sell Fat Cats out of the back of trucks, don' they?

 

[RobNJ]

Hope your group changes real-life alignment, or you find another.

Well, most of them are long term friends of mine and most of them are otherwise excellent roleplayers. Hell, I may myself be guilty of this. Who knows? So it's better for me to just remove the problem than remove the players. Least, that's how I feel.

OT: RobNJ --you wouldn't happen to be an RU student? I have many fond blurry memories of the Ale 'N Wych from my days, long ago, at Rutgers... And Fat Cats. They still sell Fat Cats out of the back of trucks, don' they?

Former student, though I still have an affiliation. I'm immune to booze so I don't do bars much, though I have been to Ale `N Wych. I had an anthropology instructor who was a grad student and who clearly fancied himself as a Hip Fellow, and had his office hours there. And yes, there are still Fat Cats, though the names have gotten positively baroque. Fat Bitch, Fat Sam, Fat Sun, Fat Koko, etc. They moved the grease trucks to their own parking lot, though, taking them off the street. Now it's like this middle-eastern bazaar (you've got middle-eastern immigrants calling out to you and trying to get you to come and patronize them, so that similarity is hardly surprising ).

 

[Desdichado]

Good points about weakening the spells and paladin abilities. As regards clerics, would it be possible to supplement the spell list using d20 sources (like Green Ronin's pocket grimoire divine) to expand the spell list and lessen the reliance on such spells?

I'm not sure what to do about paladins. I like the idea of creating an "infidels" concept, and that could help.

Paladins are the ones that have the most to lose, I think. Without them, I'd just ditch alignment and call it a day, but the 24/7 detect evil and 1/day smite evil are such ingrained features of the class that I'd be reticent to just chuck them.

 

[Grazzt]

Could always set up a system akin to the Pendragon system.

For D&D basically set up "Law/Chaos" and "Good/Evil" then assign each a number. The number for each axis cannot total more than 20. Characters alignments would shift based on actions taken, etc.

There was a thread/discussion similar to this a few months ago. I'll see if I can find the thread and bring it back to the top.