Tracking Alignment

[Green Knight]

I disagree with an above post. Energetic/Lazy should stay under Lawful/Chaotic, rather than be put under Good/Evil.

Being Lawful is someone with a disciplined spirit, which suits the Energetic trait, well. It's not necessarily a Good/Evil thing. Just because someone is energetic doesn't mean that the end goal they're working towards is always good. Just look at the Lawful Good Dwarf race and the Chaotic Good Elf race. The Dwarves are certainly energetic and industrious workers, whereas the elves wile away the time on frivolity. Both are good, yet one race is clearly energetic while the other is lazy.

Let's look at another example. The Lawful Evil Hobgoblins and the Chaotic Evil Orcs. The Hobgoblins are disciplined and single-minded, while the Orcs are undisciplined and unfocused. Both are evil, but one is Lawful and the other is Chaotic.

So Energetic/Lazy doesn't belong on the Good/Evil axis, IMO. It belongs on the Lawful/Chaotic axis.

 

[ninthcouncil]

Energetic/Lazy doesn't belong on the Good/Evil axis, IMO. It belongs on the Lawful/Chaotic axis.

I think this is a difficult one - it's arguable that it doesn't belong on either. My judgment on this is based partly on the fact that the most Energetic people I know are also the most Chaotic There's also a relevant quote I'm scrabbling around for, that goes something like "All that is required for evil to flourish, is for good men to do nothing." (Any idea where this comes from?). I'll stick with my gut feeling on this one, but I can see that it's a matter of opinion.

 

[trentonjoe]

I "All that is required for evil to flourish, is for good men to do nothing." (Any idea where this comes from?)..

I think it is Churchill but I am looking it up.

 

[trentonjoe]

I think it is Churchill but I am looking it up.

Wrong Englishen. It was:

"For evil to triumph, good men have to do nothing. "
Edmund Burke

 

[Magus_Jerel]

Actually - Franklin Delano Roosevelt used the first wording -

stealing from Burke...


As far as a concept here -

1. His would b WONDERFUL in that I can now objectively track the actions of Pc's and NPC's with respect to alignment.

2. A general rule about alignment awarding bonuses... IF this does so - then I would have it count as a "sacred" or "profane" bonus - it just fits - and could stop any serious "munchkiny" alignment play

 

[mmadsen]

So...are we done?

 

[Thorvald Kviksverd]

So...are we done?

Perhaps, except for some campaign specific tuning--starting values, trait selection, specific bonuses, etc.

For myself...

1--I definitely think I'll be including this in my campaigns from now on. I'm going to limit the traits to Good/Evil and Lawful/Chaotic, but use the subtraits you listed as guidelines for which category a given act affects.

2--I know it adds an extra level of complication, but I think I'll use a die roll to assign checks--something along the following (I still need to finalize the categories and values)...

• Trivial: d6-5
• Minor: d6-3
• Meaningful: d6
• Major: d6+3
• Life Altering: d6+5

Perhaps some acts will be so monumental as to dictate a fixed adjustment, without any checks being necessary.

3--I'll use the rule I mentioned where Chaos and Evil always have at least a 50% chance of increasing on a check.

4--Bonuses, I haven't made up my mind about these yet--whether I should include them, or what they should be if I do. Some possibilities...

• Lawful: Weapon/Skill Focus; penalty to certain "artistic" pursuits; +1 Save and AC vs Demons
• Chaotic: Bonus vs Mind Controlling Effects; penalty to "academic" pursuits
• Good: +50% HPs restored when subject to healing magic; +50% damage when subject to the reverse of these spells; +1 Save and AC vs Demons, Devils, etc.
• Evil: 50% HPs restored by healing magic; 50% damage from reverse of these spells

These bonuses are just off the top of my head, in order to convey a bit of the feel I'm going for--Lawful/Good should convey more in the way of bonuses, or Chaotic/Evil should suffer more in the way of penalties. I'd like to hear your suggestions for possible bonuses/penalties.

 

[mmadsen]

Since we're discussing this in the Pendragon d20? thread on the main board, I thought I'd give this a bit of a bump.

 

[the Jester]

Ooh, I like this idea! It reminds me of the piety system in the old Fantasy Roleplaying game hardback, which I always liked- you tracked piety according to your religion rather than a simple arbitrary Good/Evil alignment.

This could make for interesting arguments about the results of, say, detect alignment spells cast by different religions. F'rex, say cleric Bob worships a god who wants you to be chaste, honest, modest, just and kind. Instead of detect evil and the like, Bob casts either detect piety or detect impiety, and a creature with a sufficient sum of those traits reads as pious, or below a certain level as impious.

Just a thought... I've always felt that alignments cover such broad behavior that what's good to one god may be anathema to another (f'rex, lust/chastity, pride/humility, etc.)

 

[mmadsen]

This could make for interesting arguments about the results of, say, detect alignment spells cast by different religions. F'rex, say cleric Bob worships a god who wants you to be chaste, honest, modest, just and kind. Instead of detect evil and the like, Bob casts either detect piety or detect impiety, and a creature with a sufficient sum of those traits reads as pious, or below a certain level as impious.

Sounds like an interesting variant! In general, I like the idea of priests of different religions all casting Detect Evil, but it's a different Evil they detect depending on their own beliefs.