Recommend Alternative Alignment Systems

[dreaded_beast]

What I'm seeing here are not alternate alignment systems, but different ways of keeping track of standard alignment. Interesting and useful, but not really what was asked for...

Very cool mythus mage....but, uh, actually "different ways of keeping track of standard alignment", is what I was looking for.

The Book of Hallowed Might referred to their way as an "alternate alignment system", so I called it the same although it is basically just a different way of keeping track of standard alignment plus some optional rules to go along with it.

 

[Ununnilium]

Cliche, I know, but what about something like the colors in Magic? Unrelated to good and evil, while still providing a bunch of different philosophies that play off each other.

Andrew "NO .SIG MAN" "Juan" Perron, red/blue!

 

[Aesmael]

Had been planning on asking a similar question imminently, so I will attempt a minor hijack and put forth for consideration/feedback a system I have been considering for my own game.

Absurdly simple in explanation, that a tally is kept for acts in line with each alignment (Law, Chaos, Good, Evil). When a character's tally for a particular alignment exceeds that of its opposite by a certain amount (I'm thinking by a factor of five) they have the corresponding alignment. Otherwise they are Neutral on that axis.

 

[conanb]

I think that if you are going to be running a D&D game you are going to have to address the basic double axis alignment system they have set up. You either do that or look at doing adjustments to classes, skills, spells,etc. Not that that isn't possible, but a bit on the large project side. It's also crossing into the "game design" area where you have more of a chance of unbalancing things as you go.

The simple change in how you track alignment is what your looking at. I was thinking more of an up and down pool similar to experience with points earned through your actions in game. You can start out at certain points, but after that your actions in game are going to shift that alignment. It's going to change how magic, items, gods, etc. are going to react to you. I didn't want to redesign the whole system just change the dynamic of alignment in game and make it more fluid. As it is, there aren't really any good rules for when your alignment shifts other than as a DM saying "Ok. That's it. You've been acting Chaotic evil all session. You're Chaotic Evil." To which you usually have a player respond "But I'm 'X' Class! I'll lose all my powers!" Et Cetera.

It's an argument that all DM's go through. There just aren't easy rules on when a player shifts (excuse the Star Wars reference but it's the most Apropos) to the dark side. I was just trying to setup a system both my players and I could agree on and allow us to see the gradual shift in a person’s alignment. It also allowed for a lot more grays. You had one person that was maybe a little more good than another, instead of 2 people that both registered as good according to the spell. Instead of Detect Good showing “He’s Good Aligned” you’d get “He has a mild good aura” to “He’s Radiating Good.” Etc. The numbered gradations allow a lot more flexibility in alignment, as well as players to adjust their alignment to their in game personality.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Very cool mythus mage....but, uh, actually "different ways of keeping track of standard alignment", is what I was looking for.

Then you probably wouldn't be interested in the most excellent system I've come across recently, in Conan d20.

Characters can choose to have a Code of Honour or be Honourless. Those with a Code of Honour will have either a Barbaric Code or Civilised Code(?) depending upon their background.

A code of honour gives you a bonus on Will saves as long as you keep it up. A code states some things that you will do and some things that you won't do. What is nice is the overlap and contrasts between the two codes of honour.

In my current campaign there are three characters. One has no honour, one has civilised honour and one has barbaric honour.

The barbarian can betray the guy with no honour at a moments notice, but not the guy with civilised honour.

The honorable civilised guy can betray the barbarian at a moments notice, but not the dishonorable civilised chap.

The civilised guy with no code of honour can betray either of them at a moments notice.

Now my game isn't all about betrayal but it helps to show three distinct angles on behaviour. I like the way that a code of honour gives you rights (a will ST bonus) and responsibilities (ways in which you should act to be honourable according to your ethos).

Cheers

 

[Li Shenron]

Mah... it's so technincal that it reminds me of the method to measure poetry from the movie "Dead poets' society"

One for each axis of the alignment grid that DnD has mapped out.
Basically they have two axis for their alignment system, Lawful/Chaotic and Good/Evil.
Neutral in this system would be as close to 0,0 as possible. Lawful, Good numbers would be positive, and Chaotic,Evil would be negative. This would mean a Lawful good paladin might be 88,76 while a good hearted farmer might be 24,12. Both digits on a range from 100 to -100. Every action has a simple point value assigned by the Dm. So if you slaughter some innocents then you're good/evil axis might drop -20 points. Breaking the law would shift your Lawful/Chaotic axis down -10 points. Etc. This would make a more fluid alignment system but still adhere to all the spells and abilities laid out in D&D.
It also allows you to graph characters alignments on a chart, which is kind of cool. That was my original intention, but found that a fluid alignment system changed the dynamic of the game a little bit. Now every action was a lot more important for those characters that need to have an alignment to keep their powers. Good characters needed to focus more on being good and the ramifcations of their actions. Etc. Led to moral/Ethical debates about character actions.

What happens in your system if you "slaughter some innocents" every day for 20 years, therefore having been at -100 all the time, then suddenly decide to do one single good action? Do you neverthless move towards good by let's say 10 points?

 

[Scribble]

I've been thinking about a system that mainly tracks you bias towards law or chaos.

What I'm thinking of doing is adding area and organization preferences to the good/evil axis. What I mean is for instance you could choose to follow the basic tennets of what is believed to be good, or perhaps you could choose to follow the code of the paladins of (insert god here)

Each belief structure would have it's own set of codes and ideals. The system would then track how closely you followed those ideals... Some classes would have to be very strict about it, others would not.

I'm debating wether it needs to even be tracked for those classes without restrictions.

The idea grew out of wanting to remove the concrete good/evil idea. I like the concept that the leaders of a powerfull organization can secretly become corrupted. Because there is no "definite" evil or good, you can't just cast detect evil to find out.

For instance a paladin given orders by the church may think he's serving the forces of goodness, but in reality is not.

 

[diaglo]

I totally do not see any need for an alignment system whatsoever. That always seemed one of the most moronic parts of D&D to me...

but remember D&D came from a war game background.

alignments made it easy to see who was on your side in the battle.

also when Gods were introduced... it made it easy to align gods and their ethos to a particular alignment.

thus clerics(which in OD&D included Druids and Monks) and paladins had a tie to an alignment.

and then the Assassin. Blackmoor Assassin is Neutral. but that was when there were only 3 alignments. no good vs. evil.

 

[Plane Sailing]

Also I wonder to what extent the original Law/Nuetral/Chaos axis in D&D was influenced by Michael Moorcocks idea that LNC was the fundamental battleground, more than human morality (good/evil). Moorcock was one of the seminal fantasy fiction writers of the day, I could easily believe that it was homage to his idea.

 

[diaglo]

Also I wonder to what extent the original Law/Nuetral/Chaos axis in D&D was influenced by Michael Moorcocks idea that LNC was the fundamental battleground, more than human morality (good/evil). Moorcock was one of the seminal fantasy fiction writers of the day, I could easily believe that it was homage to his idea.

i'm sure his work did. i know it influenced our gaming.