Should the Alignment Scale always be known to a Player as a Resource Track?

[howandwhy99]

Players do not know what will cause Alignment shifts in the same way they do not know what will cause HP loss. But shouldn't Players know where their Alignment stands at all times? I know some clerical spells and a few other means offer the determination of current Alignment for both PCs and other things in the world, but a PC Alignment shift to Chaotic (or Evil in AD&D) has the same effect as many other resources brought to zero. It means starting the game over again at level 1, zero XP. Unlike certain other "game over" effects where Players do not track an on hand resource, like in disease, suffocation, and starvation, there is no effect described by the Referee over time to the Player. At least in cases like poison a Saving Throw allows a chance for a decision to not be a game ending one.

Certain major Alignment shifts do make sense to me for immediately causing a game ending result. For instance, an attack to kill an ally, someone of the same alignment, will cause an immediate shift to the enemy alignment. This makes sense because of the nature of the D&D game world. But I am thinking of incorporating a Saving Throw to complete such an action. It would require a roll failure, something a Player can always elect, to carry through the action and result in the PC becoming an enemy-aligned NPC. A successful save would still allow for the player to continue the attempt without, but with a warning described by the DM as the PCs God. Well, a God or the form of some other kind of warning.

Alignment shifts happen all the time, but usually on a small scale. That does make Player tracking a chore, but I have never heard of any description of these shifts to the Players. A description allows for recognition by the player of the underlying rules, while Saving Throws offer a certain indulgence to poor decisions. A "game over" effect without any warning, previous description, or a save does not seem to me to be either perceivable or playable.


Please keep any discussion to how you use the Alignment Scale.

 

[Dausuul]

I agree that it's unfair to hit players with colossal (effectively character-killing) penalties for something they have no way to track and which depends entirely on the DM's subjective judgement. At the same time, however, I like the idea that you don't know exactly when you'll cross that line; you can't be certain what will tip you from Good to Neutral, or Evil.

I also generally dislike hitting players with heavy penalties for changing alignments. It's a major barrier to roleplaying if you have to weigh every in-character decision in the light of "I might lose my character if the DM decides this action is Chaotic/Evil." And for most characters it doesn't make much sense anyway.

So, my inclination would be to eliminate mechanical penalties for alignment change, while at the same time making an effort to codify the system a little, with guidelines on what kinds of acts push you how far (probably with a random factor so the player can't track exactly where he or she is). For most characters, the only mechanical effect of alignment should be to change how you interact with divine magic.

For characters who use divine magic, of course - paladins and clerics - things should be a little different. I'd give such characters class abilities that let them determine when they are at risk of alignment change, to compensate for the fact that alignment change can shut down their abilities.

 

[Umbran]

Players do not know what will cause Alignment shifts in the same way they do not know what will cause HP loss. But shouldn't Players know where their Alignment stands at all times?

Not in my opinion. This is part of the "slippery slope" towards darkness - the human tendency to ignore some of the consequences of their actions. If you constantly remind players, they can't chose to ignore it. Plus, by the metaphysics I normally work by, the PC normally doesn't have a way to check their status.

Certain major Alignment shifts do make sense to me for immediately causing a game ending result. For instance, an attack to kill an ally, someone of the same alignment, will cause an immediate shift to the enemy alignment.

Alignment isn't "enemy/friend", by the books. A good person can have friends who are not good. Not only does the PC not know his or her own alignment, others around them don't know either.

A I play it, the single acts that will cause major change all by themselves are few. Most alignment shift is over a slow course of time.

 

[Dausuul]

Alignment isn't "enemy/friend", by the books. A good person can have friends who are not good. Not only does the PC not know his or her own alignment, others around them don't know either.

Also note that while murdering a good-aligned character is generally evil, murdering an evil-aligned character is not generally good... evil people kill one another all the time.

 

[howandwhy99]

All elements of my game have an Alignment status, so taking mechanical effects of Alignment shifts out of the game would be far too much work. Not to mention it would gimp the Cleric classes.

I should point out Alignment shifts for me are based upon predefined rules hidden behind the screen, so they are not DM's judgment. Having no expression of those rules before a game ending effect occurs, though, is fiat in my book. Hence my desire to try and bring some element of interaction with these rules to fore when a potential game ending decision is made by a Player.

Also, for my game alignment is Ally, neutral, and Enemy status. So it doesn't matter how Players play their PCs as personalities. It has more to do with recognizing the consequences of actions. Which is why the "slippery slope towards darkness" point appeals to me. But neither do I want DM fiat.

Chaotic creatures and elements do shift Alignment according to the same rules as other aligned elements, but killing allies is considered a Chaotic act so...

Chaotic isn't a playable Alignment for PCs in my game, making it a game ending condition for Players who switch to it. Which has led to me posting here about how to convey this transition. It would help for classes who do have powers connected to Alignment too. Shifts to Neutral or Lawful cause considerably less effects (edit: don't end the game), but are still pretty big.


Tangent: I should also point out that no PC is beyond bringing back in my game. Chaotic NPCs can be converted and dead PCs resurrected for Players to control again.

 

[Umbran]

Also note that while murdering a good-aligned character is generally evil, murdering an evil-aligned character is not generally good... evil people kill one another all the time.

Well, we start getting into semantics here a bit - like defining "murder", and whether it is different from other forms of killing. Such definitions are apt to vary from one campaign and GM to the next, so we can't easily generalize.

 

[Dausuul]

Well, we start getting into semantics here a bit - like defining "murder", and whether it is different from other forms of killing. Such definitions are apt to vary from one campaign and GM to the next, so we can't easily generalize.

Actually, you could substitute "kill" for "murder" in my post and it would still stand. It is very rare IMO that killing evil creatures is, in and of itself, a good act. At best, it's neutral. Any alignment boost from killing stuff has to come from the reason behind the killing.

For instance, a paladin might be rewarded with "karma points" for slaying an evil dragon that was threatening a village. In that case, the reward is not because he slew the dragon but because he saved the village, and perhaps others, at risk of his own life. If a blackguard went out and slew the same dragon because she wanted to plunder its hoard, should that threaten her evil alignment?

If the same dragon weren't a threat to anybody (perhaps it has become so old and enfeebled that it can barely leave its lair, and lives far away from any human settlements), then killing it wouldn't do anything for the paladin's alignment, though it probably wouldn't hurt it either. Conversely, the paladin could get the same alignment boost by saving the village from a raging wildfire.

(Yes, I'm aware that in 3E it's considered a good act to kill evil outsiders. This is plainly ludicrous, however; taken to its logical conclusion, it means the demons and devils battling on the front lines of the Blood War must be shining beacons of goodness.)

 

[Nifft]

A good person can have friends who are not good.

Except Paladins.

"Oh look, an alignment thread...", -- N

 

[the Jester]

In the case of a gradual shift, I think some bad dreams/sleepless nights as the pc tosses and turns over his changing value system is appropriate... in other words, a warning of sorts... but no, I don't think there should be a "smoking gun" that tells them where they are on the alignment scale.

 

[frankthedm]

Player / Characters definitely should not know their alignment status, but the Players should definitely have a WAY to know the kind of actions the DM will Rule Good/Evil/lawful/Chaotic.