Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
White Dwarf Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Nest
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
EN Publishing
Twitter
BlueSky
Facebook
Instagram
EN World
BlueSky
YouTube
Facebook
Twitter
Twitch
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What's wrong with being good?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Meridian" data-source="post: 577180" data-attributes="member: 1603"><p>Actually, I believe that, over time, the players are conditioned by the experiences they have with various GMs to regard certain alignments as desirable and others that are not. Most often, one group of players I know usually (given a choice) invariably trends toward playing true neutrally-aligned characters. The popular explanation for this phenomenon as it has been explained to me is that the alignment of "neutral" as defined in the PHB is closest to what they believe is the moral and ethical viewpoint of modern-day individuals like themselves. Of course, IMHO, since the majority also play or have played Shadowrun (touting it as their favorite or second favorite system/setting), the mindset common to veteran SR players overlaps into the way the same players create characters for D&D, i.e., as shadowrunners in a pure fantasy setting, which results in the quality of self-interest being present in the character profile to a significant degree..."let's get paid."</p><p></p><p>Because D&D in its past and present forms encourages the advancement of characters through accumulating wealth and killing monsters, it stands to reason that the good alignments are less desirable for play, as neutral characters don't *have* to think about the moral quandries good characters would sometimes find themselves encountering in pursuit of the same goals. Evil characters don't have to think about it at all, and their alignment encourages that thought process.</p><p></p><p>I used to play good characters in a group of neutrally-aligned PCs, but inevitably, I evolved away from doing so to minimize internal party conflict. I only play good characters in a group where I have at least a couple of potential allies rooted in common cause.</p><p></p><p>I would recommend that GMs desiring to condition their troupe of players to select good alignments on their own accord consider implementing the following system:</p><p></p><p>Show the *benefits* of being good-aligned within the setting and the campaign!</p><p></p><p>Off the top of my head, let the good-aligned characters receive bonuses on reaction rolls with NPCs...that is if the players are playing true to alignment. This can be rationalized by the NPCs picking up a "vibe" off of the PC that encourages interaction and empathy. Simplistic, but kind of the direction you want to go to accomplish the goal.</p><p></p><p>Better yet, ask your players' opinions. See if there is anything you can do to tweak the way players of good PCs receive a sense of reward without encouraging the mercenary aspects.</p><p></p><p>My two cents.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Meridian, post: 577180, member: 1603"] Actually, I believe that, over time, the players are conditioned by the experiences they have with various GMs to regard certain alignments as desirable and others that are not. Most often, one group of players I know usually (given a choice) invariably trends toward playing true neutrally-aligned characters. The popular explanation for this phenomenon as it has been explained to me is that the alignment of "neutral" as defined in the PHB is closest to what they believe is the moral and ethical viewpoint of modern-day individuals like themselves. Of course, IMHO, since the majority also play or have played Shadowrun (touting it as their favorite or second favorite system/setting), the mindset common to veteran SR players overlaps into the way the same players create characters for D&D, i.e., as shadowrunners in a pure fantasy setting, which results in the quality of self-interest being present in the character profile to a significant degree..."let's get paid." Because D&D in its past and present forms encourages the advancement of characters through accumulating wealth and killing monsters, it stands to reason that the good alignments are less desirable for play, as neutral characters don't *have* to think about the moral quandries good characters would sometimes find themselves encountering in pursuit of the same goals. Evil characters don't have to think about it at all, and their alignment encourages that thought process. I used to play good characters in a group of neutrally-aligned PCs, but inevitably, I evolved away from doing so to minimize internal party conflict. I only play good characters in a group where I have at least a couple of potential allies rooted in common cause. I would recommend that GMs desiring to condition their troupe of players to select good alignments on their own accord consider implementing the following system: Show the *benefits* of being good-aligned within the setting and the campaign! Off the top of my head, let the good-aligned characters receive bonuses on reaction rolls with NPCs...that is if the players are playing true to alignment. This can be rationalized by the NPCs picking up a "vibe" off of the PC that encourages interaction and empathy. Simplistic, but kind of the direction you want to go to accomplish the goal. Better yet, ask your players' opinions. See if there is anything you can do to tweak the way players of good PCs receive a sense of reward without encouraging the mercenary aspects. My two cents. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
What's wrong with being good?
Top