D&D 5E Players voting on each other's alignments?

[BookTenTiger]

I really enjoy alignment in my games and this sounds fun, with one exception. I don't like the idea of being "forced" to conform to the groups expectations if they don't feel the RP is adequate. I prefer to leave that to the player and GM. Its pretty rare I find that someone seems acting out of alignment. For example, a good character who resorts to wanton murder and never cares about anybody in the fallout is not going to remain good. I do enjoy the discussions very much at the table about characters and NPCs though.

Thanks for the constructive reply!

Yeah, I see this as more an opportunity for a roleplaying challenge, or a collaborative approach towards alignment rather than a straightjacket. For example, if a player has in mind a Lawful Good paladin, but the other players see him as more Lawful Neutral, it could provide an interesting opportunity to lean in more towards that Neutrality, or to look for more chances to show the Good side.

Ultimately, I think the best way to go about this would be to not have an alignment in mind, and just play your character how you want. The voting would just be an interesting assessment of how others see your character!

 

[BookTenTiger]

If you think the idea would be fun and your fellow gamers agree, go for it. It's not unprecedented. AD&D Dragonlance had an alignment track where the DM could gradually shift a character towards the alignment they were playing versus declared.

However, it'd be a better idea to treat this like a debrief (here's what we're noticing) versus a requirement (you must change this).

I'm not sure where folks are getting the idea of this as a requirement or straightjacket...

I agree that this would be a neat thing to fold into a regular debrief throughout the campaign. A lot of the time I give players an opportunity to describe how their characters are changing over time. But it would be interesting to have other players describe how your character has changed!

A neat challenge for the table would be to give the other players options for what change they see as appropriate for your character after a period of time. Maybe they could vote on "change of alignment" or "new ideal" or "new bond" or something. Of course it would take a group of players who are willing to take on those roleplaying challenges! I know I would have fun with it personally.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I am not a fan of the implied moral judgement of alignment. I'm way less of a fan of active moral judgement at the table, especially combined with any idea of making the player follow that moral judgement as it applies to their character.

 

[toucanbuzz]

I'm not sure where folks are getting the idea of this as a requirement or straightjacket...

I think it was the language of your original post (even if not your intent) of:

Then, each player would either commit to that alignment, or adjust their roleplaying to better fit their original choice.

It may have sounded like players would be forced to go with the group vote.

 

[payn]

Thanks for the constructive reply!

Yeah, I see this as more an opportunity for a roleplaying challenge, or a collaborative approach towards alignment rather than a straightjacket. For example, if a player has in mind a Lawful Good paladin, but the other players see him as more Lawful Neutral, it could provide an interesting opportunity to lean in more towards that Neutrality, or to look for more chances to show the Good side.

Ultimately, I think the best way to go about this would be to not have an alignment in mind, and just play your character how you want. The voting would just be an interesting assessment of how others see your character!

Yeap, I always pick an alignment when I begin a campaign (whether GM uses it or not). I do assume the character will organically form through play so its not something I hardcode into behavior. So, I would love make a group activity out of this process and encourage table talk. I think a sound session zero would be a good idea for setting it up.

 

[BookTenTiger]

Yeap, I always pick an alignment when I begin a campaign (whether GM uses it or not). I do assume the character will organically form through play so its not something I hardcode into behavior. So, I would love make a group activity out of this process and encourage table talk. I think a sound session zero would be a good idea for setting it up.

I was recently in a couple of campaigns in which I was very surprised by the chosen alignments of the characters. When I found out one character was Chaotic Neutral and one character was Neutral Evil, it didn't seem to match the choices the players were making.

Now that's not actually a problem at all, and it's fine for players to make whatever kinds of choices they want.

But... doing something bold like voting on the perceived alignment of each character could provide interesting opportunities for those players to lean into their alignments.

If the CN character is voted Chaotic Good or Lawful Neutral, they may realize they aren't taking the opportunities to be more chaotic. If the NE character is voted Neutral or LN, they may enjoy the chance to play more evil. Or they may accept that their initial concept of the character has changed and go with the group decision!

Ultimately I would see this kind of voting as more a group communication strategy and roleplaying challenge than anything else.

 

[MNblockhead]

That would be a contender of the fastest way to destroy a campaign.
As you can see on this board discussions about alignment never go well.

Internet discussion board debates do not necessarily correlate to individual groups. I've never had an argument in my group.

But that may be because I'm a Lawful Evil DM and they wouldn't dare challenge my adherence to the traditional alignment system in my games.

 

[Ruin Explorer]

I'm not sure where folks are getting the idea of this as a requirement or straightjacket...

Then, each player would either commit to that alignment, or adjust their roleplaying to better fit their original choice.

So that second sentence, the one from your original post, is why people think that.

 

[Umbran]

Here's a fun idea:

When a campaign first starts, players can choose an alignment for their character, but they keep it secret from the other players. After 3 - 5 sessions, the players vote on what they think the alignment of each character is. Then, each player would either commit to that alignment, or adjust their roleplaying to better fit their original choice.

Given that alignment isn't a "commitment", and in 5e has no mechanical impact to speak of, I don't think this exercise has much value.

Here's an alternative: Everyone plays their character for 3-5 sessions. Then, everyone goes and chooses one or two songs or musical pieces that seem to thematically match each character. Make a playlist for the campaign. Have fun trying to guess which song is for which character.

 

[BookTenTiger]

So that second sentence, the one from your original post, is why people think that.

Interesting... I specifically included that sentence to show it wasn't a forced decision. To me it would go something like:

Group votes on Chaotic Good.

Me: Huh, I had originally thought of my wizard as Neutral Good.

Group: He seems very anti-establisment.

Me: You're right, I think I want to play more into that. (Changes alignment to Chaotic Good.)

OR

Me: I think I'm going to lighten up on that and focus on his altruism. (Keeps alignment as Neutral Good.)