Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Jay Verkuilen" data-source="post: 7783330" data-attributes="member: 6873517">Totally agree that it's really no more than a sometimes useful two-word phrase descriptor of a PC and that we shouldn't treat it with the same seriousness as genuine RL moral inquiry. I think you could, but that kind of character might be a good candidate for Chaotic Neutral. Given that it has two descriptors, I would call it two dimensional, right? (You may have meant by one dimensional that it wasn't very deep. I agree with that.) From what I understand, many authors and screenwriters find assigning alignments useful as a starting point for their characters, so the D&D alignment system has seen some use outside of D&D. However, I think it's important to recall it's a starting point, not a finishing point. I've played with various rebuilds of it. A friend of mine used a three score system: Integrity, Mercy, and Courage. Characters had values assigned to them and (on an optional basis for the player) one could check against that score. I often found that helpful to make decisions when I felt genuinely torn about what action I'd take, essentially using the dice as a way to help guide improvisation. For example, a character with high Integrity and Courage but low Mercy would likely be OK with treating prisoners harshly as long as it wasn't against a personal code but would be highly unlikely to run in the face of opposition. Of course, if a Courage check was failed, this might be a good opportunity for some uncharacteristic behavior to emerge. White Wolf's Exalted had four numbers: Compassion, Conviction, Temperance, and Valor and one often needed to make checks against these stats.</blockquote>

Verification