No alignment

[Hurtoc]

(Sorry if this topic has been hashed and rehashed)

I'd like to run my next campaign with no concept of Alignment.
This would mean that alignment-specific spells and abilities would either be removed from the game or changed (i.e. Detect Evil could be Detect Evil Intent or Detect Creatures that Want You Dead or something); classes that require specific alignments would no longer have such a restriction of course.

What are the ramifications of no Alignment beyond this? Anyone tried this and had success/problems?

 

[Norfleet]

Works fairly well. Most of the time, alignment isn't a huge issue unless you're running a very black-and-white campaign, anyway. Only a few classes have anything along the lines of alignment strictures, and even those are more of a way to indicate a code of conduct than an actual alignment. Alignment is a fairly minor thing which rarely plays an important role in and of itself. People are more complex than a simple alignment system portrays.

 

[Thimble the Squit]

Alternative alignment systems

Oriental Adventures offers an optional alternative alignment system: Honor vs Taint, and suggests changes to those specified spells.

Similarly, RuneQuest and Warhammer both borrow heavily from Michael Moorcock's axioms of Law vs Chaos (which is the original progenitor of DnD's own system but has changed dramatically since then).

In Nomine, unsurprisingly, balances Corruption and Divinity.

You might want to lose alignment as a roleplaying crutch but then to reintroduce it, for its mythological value, as the roleplaying hook that it was originally meant to be. That way, everyone can be Neutral, so far as they're aware of having any alignment at all, but that there can be major forces in the world which are truly Good or despicably Evil. There might then be characters in your games like Elric -- a Champion of Law who actually serves a Chaos Demon. By these conflicts are the best stories told.

 

[SylverFlame]

The biggest effect it has is on character. If you're playing a "slap and go" adventure alignment offers an easy point to build a character from.

If you want a campaign with a fair bit of "character", where the players define what their PC is and how they act, then just get everyone to write a paragraph outlining their major motivations.

I like non-alignment games because you see more conflict in the PC's on a personal (within itself that is) level. It can hurt your in-character situations a little, but with a little pre-work it can be a throughly enjoyable situation.

For instance, a Paladin without alignment has to justify an act according to their code rather than their alignment (a tricky situation as many posts here have shown). Be careful and be open to characters doing rash things, like paladins "neglecting" to notice the thief back-stabbing someone who is against the paladin's faith. Be sure the character's are aware of the turmoil this can cause and things will be good.

Best wishes, and, as always, have fun.

EDIT: Made it readable.

 

[MarauderX]

I ran a long long campaign with no alignment rules or restrictions, pre-3E, and it worked out well. There were those players that acted good and those that didn't, and it usually affected the party reputation accordingly. For alignment based spells, I just had it with the affects of 'Protection from those who don't like me' or similiar. It also worked out well when two lawful armies fought because of political reasons and were casting anti-alignment spells in battle.

 

[Azlan]

This would mean that alignment-specific spells and abilities would either be removed from the game or changed (i.e. Detect Evil could be Detect Evil Intent or Detect Creatures that Want You Dead or something)

So, Detect Evil would not detect a succubus demon who's in disguise but minding her own business, with no evil intent currently on her mind; but Detect Evil would detect a ravenous (though formerly "neutral") animal that wants to eat you?

What are the ramifications of no Alignment beyond this?

A good way to delve into this, initially, is to go over everything about a paladin and his abilities, in the Player's Handbook, and see what changes and effects that would entail.

 

[Vanguard]

(Sorry if this topic has been hashed and rehashed)

I'd like to run my next campaign with no concept of Alignment.
This would mean that alignment-specific spells and abilities would either be removed from the game or changed (i.e. Detect Evil could be Detect Evil Intent or Detect Creatures that Want You Dead or something); classes that require specific alignments would no longer have such a restriction of course.

What are the ramifications of no Alignment beyond this? Anyone tried this and had success/problems?

As mentioned above, you end up with some weird situations if you go by intent. Does the spell measure present intent or future intent? If its only present intent, the spell becomes mostly useless. If it goes by future intent, then you have to decide how far in the future it can detect, which could also be problematic.

A better plan would be to take away alignments for most creatures, and the "detect [alignment]" spells and such would only work on creatures which had the [alignment] subtype. In this way you could detect a succubus in disguise as evil.

You could add some other things that can be affected by an alignment-based spell, like "Clerics of an [alignment] diety with at least x levels in cleric" or "Creatures whose alignment is "Always [alignment]" in the monster manual. You get the idea.

Depending on how you run your game and how you've interpreted "detect evil" and such previously, this will make alignment-based spells either more or less useful...be mindful of that fact before you start your game.

 

[Galadare]

Originally posted by Vanguard
A better plan would be to take away alignments for most creatures, and the "detect [alignment]" spells and such would only work on creatures which had the [alignment] subtype. In this way you could detect a succubus in disguise as evil.

You could add some other things that can be affected by an alignment-based spell, like "Clerics of an [alignment] diety with at least x levels in cleric" or "Creatures whose alignment is "Always [alignment]" in the monster manual. You get the idea.

A similar option is to remove "Detect [Alignment]" spells in favor of "Detect [Type/Subtype]" spells such as "Detect Undead" or "Detect Devils".

Alternatively, you could introduce an all purpose spell. Such a spell would allow the caster to specify the criteria and may require a scrying check to determine the effective range and the level of detail regarding the information gleaned.

 

[SylverFlame]

So, Detect Evil would not detect a succubus demon who's in disguise but minding her own business

In the case of things like Devils, Demons, Daemons, and Celestials which have highly aligned aspects, just rule that, due to length of life and degree of acts they pervade an aura of a particular alignment.

As such, the succubus is not evil as such, instead she pervades evil intent no matter where she is or what she is doing.

This would also make for a fun event when you have an evil outsider who wants to change their ways but will always show up as evil on the radar.

 

[kengar]

The way I house rule it is that spells like Detect Evil don't work on mundane, sentient creatures like humans or orcs. In other words, a CE orc raider doesn't register.

However, supernatural/magical creatures do get detected. Things like the above-mentioned succubus, undead, evil dragons, etc. Also, a "person" with a supernatural affiliation with evil would get detected as well (Blackguards, Evil clerics, etc.).

I still use alignment IMC, it's just a little less metaphysical for most people.