The Alignment System & "Real" Alignments

[chad878262]

The alignment system is fine so long as you understand it is a base line and the individual character will have some things that go against that alignment/archetype.

The Lawful Good paladin living in an unjust society would certainly seek to work within the system, but if it came down to it the paladin would not necessarily fall from grace for breaking unjust laws or disobeying an evil / wrong command. My biggest issue, which I'm glad is not possible on this server is detecting alignment. Neutral evil, for instance is ultimately selfish. A NE character may not seek to harm others, s/he might do harm if someone were in their way, but what if it never came up. A farmer could be utterly selfish, never help neighbours and even harbor ill thoughts, but if due to cowardice or lack of opportunity should he set off a radar to the adventuring paladin/cleric?

Joe Paladin "Ah! I detect you as evil, die villainous scum!"
John Farmer "Wha?! I never done nuthin ta nobody, tin head!"
Joe Paladin *cuts off farmers head* "Justice is served"

Yeah, kinda silly imo.

I see alignment as a baseline to help define your character upbringing and internal moral compass. Just because your lawful good doesn't mean you wouldn't break the law if you saw a beggar steal some cheese if you felt sorry for him or your father had to beg when you were growing up. Likewise just because you're neutral evil doesn't mean you might not help a dock rat just because you were a dock rat in your youth even though it may in itself be an altruistic act.

A good character may even do evil because they see it as serving the greater good (though this would be fallen paladin territory not all LG are paladin or clerics).

[Ariella]

The Alignment aspect is a Tool for Role-play. Most tools require a certain amount of training, for proper use.

This Server follows a principle of "Play your Character Sheet." If there exists an Alignment on it, then...

The alignment on your character sheet is your past, How you act in the future is up to you and up to the DMs how your sheet will reflect it.

[Steve]

The alignment on your character sheet is your past, How you act in the future is up to you and up to the DMs how your sheet will reflect it.

An opinion. But noted.

[thids]

Yes, the alignment you give your character is determined by the type of character you want to RP. OOCly your characters past and outlook on the world is set by that alignment, but IC it's the other way around. A character CAN act outside of their alignment, a character CAN get an alignment shift. Neither of those things break any kind of rules. Implying that any character who does something outside of their alignment is breaking the "RP your character sheet" rule is just beyond ridiculous.

Now, there are situations where characters do things completely out of the norm for them with no valid IC motivation. Or even worse, when people make characters whose entire concept is based around "breaking" the alignment instead of letting the character progress at a natural pace. For an example when someone makes an evil character with the aim of redemption from the start, or when someone rolls out a paladin and starts looking at Blackguard builds immediately, trying to find a way for their character to become the brooding fallen paladin at any cost etc. Those are outright bad character concepts, that usually end up in disappointment when things don't go the player's way.


Those things can't be policed by rules. The choice of characters actions are between the player and their conscience.

[Steve]

Implying that any character who does something outside of their alignment is breaking the "RP your character sheet" rule is just beyond ridiculous.

What do you think about Alignment Requirements, Thids, for certain PrCs?

[thids]

Most of them are there for a reason. Most of the PrC's also have a clearly defined rule on what happens when the character's alignment shifts to an alignment which doesn't meet the requirement. As I stated above, if someone picks a PrC, gets all the levels out of it that they want then starts RPing outside of their alignment, that is not something that can be policed by the rules.

[Steve]

...gets all the levels out of it that they want then starts RPing outside of their alignment, that is not something that can be policed by the rules.

Where did the "policing" come from this?

Alignment is, like I say, a tool for Role-play. If you want to use it, obviously, there are ways in which how to learn to use it better. "Play your Character Sheet," like I said, is a principle—actually a Rule—of this Server.

But obviously, Players can and will develop strategies in words and actions in which to devalue Alignment, for whatever reason (I can only assume it is from an idea that it restricts Role-play, instead of bolsters it).

I quoted the part of your post above, Thids, because I think it illustrates a way of looking at the behavior, moral choices, of a PC, as OOC manipulable. Quite like how you said earlier: "...there are situations where characters do things completely out of the norm for them with no valid IC motivation."

Sure, if it is better Role-play to allow our PC's morality and World View be an OOC aspect, then surely, it would be better to through out Alignments all together. That I get. But considering D&D is regulated by Alignments, to such an extent that it "unlocks" such things as PrCs and more, shouldn't then, with such freedom to OOC willfully change your PCs alignment, that your PC then also forgoes the "power" (mechanical aspects) of the PrC, as just one example? And not just as it pertains to the Paladin.

Just my thoughts on it.

Oh wait...we have the RCR Tool...foiled again!

[thids]

Policing comes from you implying that characters taking actions which would clearly be outside of their alignment is breaking the "RP your character sheet rule". Rule breakers should be dealt with in some manner, shouldn't they? Except alignment is a dynamic thing, it clearly doesn't fall under that rule, at least not in the same sense everything else does. If it did, every character would be static in terms of their alignment (which is the case in majority of cases, ironically, since the DM's can't run around handing out alignment points) and you'd have endless debates over what's appropriate and what isn't appropriate for a character of a certain alignment to do.


As for PC moral choices being manipulated by the player OOCly, what are we even talking about here? Of course PC choices are manipulated by the player, the player controls the character. Yes, it can be over the top sometimes, but it's that players character. They have the right to do whatever they want with it, as long as they don't break the rules of the server.

In any case, D&D and nwn2 have clear rules in regards to what happens when an alignment shift occurs and the character's new alignment isn't appropriate for the PrC they have taken. And in large majority of cases, those rules make perfect sense.

[Steve]

I posted this thread in order to supply some information to Role-Players so that they can investigate and better support a PC's morality and purpose, based on Alignment—as it is described in D&D:

...a categorization of the ethical and moral perspective of player characters, non-player characters, and creatures.

Now, personally, I do not have issue whether a Player sees it as "my Toon has X Alignment, therefore acts in this manner," or, "my Toon acts in this manner, therefore, has X Alignment." There is no policing involved here: RP of PCs involves ethical and moral perspectives, and these either create or follow, actions. Or, roles.

If anything, I would take issue with a Player who decides their PC is "a hedonistic, benevolent, power-hungry universalist." Essentially, a complete disregard for a Game where Alignment is established to assist Players in "playing the role" of a moral-type, a ethical-type. A complete disregard to the ingrained nature of moral beliefs, and, where the Player will take OOC need and apply it to a Character, which has no "moral ground" from which to act a new or certain way.

Why not just roll up a new Character, if you feel the need to RP a different Moral Compass?

You might have seen this one during your travels in the Gate:



Such a winner! But don't get me wrong: creativity is empowered with good "tools."

[chad878262]

I once participated in an event where a player argued against attacking lizard men (who were hostile), but later defended an imp when my character became aggressive with the thing. I expressed some frustration to the DM involved and it was indicated that alignment adjustment points were going to be forth coming for some players involved. Not sure if that occurred, but it appears alignment is policed in events and I imagine if you notice inconsistent behaviour and send chat logs/screen shots to the dms they would probably address it with the player in question (unless perhaps the players alignment is chaotic neutral and they just flip a coin to see what action they might take in a given scenario)... I have certainly had alignment points awarded here and there, some I did not necessarily agree with, but that's the great thing about rp...you can only rp your actions/thoughts/motives, not the outcome or perception of those actions. For this reason if I get evil points for doing what I thought of as more of a chaotic good appropriate action, cool! Unknown consequences are a part of life so are a welcome part of rp.

[NeOmega]

alignment is a two dimensional perspective of human nature in a mostly sea of one dimensional phenotypes. for example, meyers-briggs is one dimensional. a set of four binary choices, whilst the alignment system is a pair of axes 3 long intersecting with each other. it is not three dimensional, that is what human players provide. But i think it is a great guideline. i personally think the only axes are chaos and order, but evil and good, aligned in human terms with death and pain vs. growth and pleasure, respectively, help us understand order and chaos from a human perspective.

I've read plenty of theories that categorize people in spectrums, but i think the D&D alignment system is pretty damn good, especially when taken from a real-world metaphysical view and even socio-psychological view.

[Evelyn]

Alignment. Its always just been training wheels for RP right?

DM "You are a lawful good paladin. NO! You can not agree with the thief that all the imprisoned villagers should now pay a tax directly to your adventuring party. Their Freedom is repayment enough."

PLAYER "Lame! Are their Chaotic Good Paladins that still get Holy Avengers? I'm more like the Chaotic Good Type!"

DM "*Sigh*"

Honestly I was glad they just got rid of the whole Alignment System after 2nd edition.

Although the alignment system does kind of work. Give me any major fictional character of the last 50 years. I could likely argue what their alignment is with you

Am I the only one that spends their time this way?.....

People tend to possess the whole spectrum, they just generally lean towards one side more than the other depending on the individual. To be forced to play one specific alignment is to restrict the possibilities that makes a personality unique and overall believable. For example, a person can be selfless one moment and completely selfish the next, creating hypocrisy which contradicts each other. Yet it is still common to possess both, creating you as a whole. Everyone is both inherently good and evil, selfless and selfish, happy and sad, respectful and disrespectful, etc.

There's an old quote "I'm fighting a battle, a battle within me. There's two wolves inside of me, one who is kindness and compassion, the other is hate and envy. Everyday these two wolves tear each other apart but it's not the bigger/better wolf that wins, it's the one I feed."

So I just lean a character for the most part to the half of the spectrum where their core alignment resides, with momentary lapses every now and then depending on what backstory I have in mind for them and whatever triggers that are presented during RP in their current state that could either motivate or dampen their ideals.

[R0ninknight]

Pretty good read.

[Steve]

Far, far too long since a *bump*

[Thaelis]

You know, after reading this I feel that it's pretty ridiculous that the standard Elf alignment is Chaotic Good. If the vast majority, even 40% of the population "don't respect authority, follow their own conscience" then how do they have cities, peaceful societies, leadership structures etc. At best Elf society is Neutral Good (which would have to mean the majority of Elves are Neutral Good)