Giving alignment meaning.

[RACER_X?HAHAHA]

Let's face it, alignment is neglected. I'd like to change that.

I propose a little system.

Each axis gets a number of traits ascribed to it. Each player has the choice of picking an alignment or picking 8 traits from any axis of alignment.

If they pick an alignment, have them pick 8 traits from the combined pool of options with at least one from each axis. For example, for a CG character they may pick 7 good traits and one chaotic or 4 of each, etc.

If they pick 8 traits from all the axes, average the results and give the player his alignment.

What do you think, any ideas?

 

[dragonfriend7738]

My preferred method is to define the actions of a character as they play them as they relate to the various axes, and mark when they are moving away from their current alignment.

I find that a lot of characters tend to float around neutrality more than they'd think (the lawful character turning a blind eye as the thief pilfers goods, or the chaotic neutral character attacking a slaver, ect.) To allow for the more fluid alignments, I am more lenient towards the alignment specific classes- I allow for the paladin variants, and monks are required to have a personal code more than a lawful alignment, for example.

The players I've done this with find it more interesting, as their actions determine their aligment, which allows them to play their character more, as opposed to their alignment determining their actions, which makes some people feel boxed into a certian set of actions that they don't want to do.

 

[RACER_X?HAHAHA]

You have a good point, though my first post is mostly for character creation. I feel like it's a good place to start.

 

[dragonfriend7738]

You have a good point, though my first post is mostly for character creation. I feel like it's a good place to start.

For character creation I usually let the characters pick the alignment that they feel that their character falls under, as a starting point for where their 'alignment gague' is at the beginning of the campaign. It also allows me a sense of where they intend to be on the scale, so I can give them apropriate warnings when they stray off of their alignment.

 

[Li Shenron]

I think those "traits" would help a lot all those players that are not sure what alignment means, and all those groups where the DM and the players have different views. Traits are more practical, easy to use for roleplaying ideas, more clearly defined thus hard to disagree upon.

That said, I would never bother fixing rules such as "pick this number of traits, minimum... maximum...", who cares? They are supposed to help, not to make you spend time thinking "I still need to pick two more, what should I do?"

I think it would be great if the DMG (or PHB) had a table of traits, very short self-explanatory words or expressions like: "faithful", "keeps his word", "greedy", "hates criminals" etc. but without rules forcing you to pick a number of them.

Another thing that always helps greatly is having a code of conduct. It doesn't have to come from a source (e.g. the PC's religion or group of affiliation), it can be a "virtual" code that no one in the fictional world has written down, not even the PC itself, but "in practice" summarizes her values.

 

[Greenfield]

As a player, I tend to use alignment as a tool in defining and developing a character personality.

One Chaotic type might be the determined free spirit, refusing to be nailed down by responsibility. Another might be the determined rebel, out to change the social order. Yet another might be the apologist, trying to be a reliable sort and always sorry for failing.

Some Lawful types might be steady and stubborn, pursuing a goal to the end. Others might be scrupulously honest. Some might be "true believers" in the social order, rejecting the very notion that a commoner should ever aspire to a noble rank: "We were placed on the ladder of life by the gods. Who are we to question that?". Others might hold personal loyalty as paramount.

I had the opportunity to play an Imp in one game, who's alignment is defined as "always lawful evil". My approach to this (which I talked over with the DM in advance) was that he couldn't lie. He didn't have to tell the truth, mind you, but whatever he said had to be technically accurate. The rationale was that Devils deal in souls, and that means contracts. You lie in a contract, and the contract is void. As an example, one PC asked mine if he could trust me. I pretended to be insulted as I answered, "You know I'd never betray a friend!". What I neglected to mention was that his character was not a friend.

So while what was suggested in the OP sounded like a micro-version of Domain abilities for clerics, I can see what the author is getting at. In effect, I do something similar.

The hard part is that many players aren't that good at playing anything other than themselves. No matter what alignment is written on the sheet, they're always driven by the same rationale, the same goals and the same approach to achieving those goals.

Ultimately, the players who could benefit most from such guideposts are the ones least capable of doing so.

 

[RACER_X?HAHAHA]

Precisely, there are a lot of people I know that are a little sketchy on the role part of roleplaying.

As for the numbers I used, they're arbitrary. I picked 8 because it was nice and round, but you could pick as many as you like or as few as 2.

 

[nijineko]

everyone knows (or knew) how to role play. kids do it naturally and instinctively every day.

i suspect that the problem comes when people cannot bring themselves to think from another viewpoint.

[sarcasm]after all, if they did that then they might actually start understanding each other, and then society would start to crumble, and oh no, the children, and anarchy and destruction of the natural order![/sarcasm]

 

[Sunseeker]

I still prefer alignment as more fluff and less crunch. Let morality matter to the games, gamers and DMs who want it to matter. For people who it doesn't matter for, don't force them into it by having a bunch of really useful stuff they can't take unless they're Lawful Evil or Chaotic Neutral.

 

[RACER_X?HAHAHA]

everyone knows (or knew) how to role play. kids do it naturally and instinctively every day.

i suspect that the problem comes when people cannot bring themselves to think from another viewpoint.

[sarcasm]after all, if they did that then they might actually start understanding each other, and then society would start to crumble, and oh no, the children, and anarchy and destruction of the natural order![/sarcasm]

Too true. That's why you got to keep reminding them.