|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 7:21PM
#31
|
|
|
Now put the emphasis on Good versus evil. To do this put circles around the non lawful goods, the three neutrals and the non chaotic evils. Like this:
Lawful good (Neutral good, Chaotic good) (Lawful neutral, True neutral, Chaotic neutral) (Lawful evil, Neutral evil) Chaotic evil
Except: Why is Lawful Good still there? It's not relevant to Good Vs. Evil is it?
Well, no, not unless you want Lawful Good to mean "Gooder than Good".
You could just as well pick: Chaotic Good, Good, Unaligned, Evil, Lawful Evil.
Or, if you actually wanted to put the emphasis on Good v. Evil, you could have Good, Neutral, Evil, and leave it at that. That's a sensible alignment system.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 7:27PM
#32
|
|
|
You're not Chaotic Good. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else.
Alignment needs to die in a fire.
"You're not a Brony. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else."
"You're not a Human. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else."
"You're not nice. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with one word, just like everybody else."
Just because Chaotic Good isn't a full description doesn't mean it's not a description. If I describe someone as "friendly" that doesn't mean they have no other traits.
Win.
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept.
Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new.
Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept.
Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Default module =/= Core mechanic.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 7:43PM
#33
|
Date Joined:
Oct 30, 2011
|
You're not Chaotic Good. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else.
Alignment needs to die in a fire.
"You're not a Brony. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else."
"You're not a Human. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else."
"You're not nice. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with one word, just like everybody else."
Just because Chaotic Good isn't a full description doesn't mean it's not a description. If I describe someone as "friendly" that doesn't mean they have no other traits.
Win.
Fail. He is a brony, but it is one of his personality traits. Being a human has no effect on his motivations and behaviors. Nice is a trait.
However, chaotic good is a way a life, an alignment that shows your place in the cosmos acording to D&D mythos, the very expression of his personality.
CAN I HAZ DEPLOMAZ NOW?
holydoom.weebly.com: Holydoom! A lighthearted RPG in progress. Loosely based on 3.5. 4, and GURPS. Very, Very, Very loosely. Seriously, visit it now. http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/ … s_Handbook An attempt at CharOp To anyone who thinks Pathfinder is outselling D&D
Show
While one report may say that FLGS report a greater amount of book sales, one cannot forget the fact that the 71000 DDI subscribers paying 6-10 dollars a month don't count as "Book Sales." "see sig" redirects here
Show
Oblivious troll is Oblivious PbP supporter! General thoughts, feelings, and info on DDN!
Show
Stuff I Heard Mike Say (subject to change): Multiclassing will be different than in 3.5! That's important.
There is no level cap; classes advance ala 3.5 epic levels after a set level.
Mundane (AKA fighter and co) encounter and daily powers will probably not be in the PHB (for the lack of space), but nor will they be in some obscure book released halfway through the edition. You can't please everyone, but you can please me. I DO NOT WANT A FREAKING 4E REPEAT. I DO NOT WANT A MODULE THAT MIMICS MY FAVORITE EDITION. I WANT MODULES THAT MIMIC A PLAYSTYLE AND CAN BE INTERCHANGED TO COMPLETELY CHANGE THE FEEL, BUT NOT THE THEME, OF D&D. A perfect example would be an espionage module, or desert survival. A BAD EXAMPLE IS HEALING SURGES. WE HAVE 4E FOR THOSE! A good example is a way to combine a mundane and self healing module, a high-survival-rate module, and a separate pool of healing resource module.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 7:45PM
#34
|
|
|
Chaotic Good isn't even a partial description, because nobody knows what it means and nobody can agree on what behaviors or characters fit it. It's meaningless psychobabble, and instead we should actually write down words that actually MEAN SOMETHING on our character sheets to describe our character's personalities.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 7:46PM
#35
|
Date Joined:
Nov 13, 2011
|
i dislike alignment because:
1- they're too vague and open to interpretation. most people understand what "friendly" or "loyal" means and that description is pretty much the same across everyone. "chaotic neutral", not so much. if no two DMs can start a campaing without a frank discussion on alignments pre-game, we have an issue. it gets worse because you have 5 people at that table, each with their own ideas about what is good/evil/chaotic/lawful/purple/square or whatever.
2- it's impersonal. the two words are supposed to be so vague in meaning or open to interpretation, that they simply don't fit most characters. i would much rather see something like White Wolf's virtues/vices, Mouseguard's Motto & Fate's Aspects in it's place.
WW gives each character 1 virtue and 1 vice to be used as recharge mechanics. if a player plays up their virtue or vice, the game rewards them. for the most part, a virtue will require some sort of sacrifice (the virtue of charity, for example, would mean going out of your way to help someone in need or in trouble) while a vice would usually give you a quick boon, but could come back to haunt you (a slothful character might simply lie low and wait for someone else to take out the crackhead bank robber, even though he can easily disarm the guy. his lack of action might end up with someone dying).
mouseguard's motto/belief/whatnot is a declaration that is personal and important to the character that gives the PC some direction. it could be something as breif as "live by the sword, die by the sword" for a barbarian or "for the glory of king & country" for a knight to something more elaborate, akin to a paladin's vows.
Fate's aspects are a mix of themes, backgrounds and other qualifiers. Batman, for example could have the aspect of "filthy rich" which lets him affort all his toys or how Superman could have an aspect representing his "mild-mannered reporter Clark Kent" persona. others could be more active in their use, like how a character with the aspect of "brash" or "reckless" might get some extra bonuses if he manages to do something that catches an enemy off guard (though if they're expecting it, our hero might get a penalty for his lack of foresight).
3- their punitive nature. your alignment almost never works to your benefit and rather signals which effects can harm you. from the lowly detect/protection VS align to the holy/unholy words, to the no chaotic martial artists, to bards that can only shun authority, to sparkly knights who stop sparkling, they always serve to block out options or hurt you.
the only "benefit" from picking an alignment is to not be affected by some spells/abilities
those are my main beefs with alignement but i could go more into detail. i just don't like how it's ever been handled.
i guess if alignment is supposed to be shorthand equivalent of telling me someone's "friendly" that still doesn't tell me much about this person. i don't know his motivations, his likes, his dislikes, etc... i have no idea if i'm going to get along with this person.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 7:47PM
#36
|
|
|
Chaotic Good isn't even a partial description, because nobody knows what it means and nobody can agree on what behaviors or characters fit it. It's meaningless psychobabble, and instead we should actually write down words that actually MEAN SOMETHING on our character sheets to describe our character's personalities.
I know exactly what it means in the context of my campaigns.
Question: if players substituted alignment with personality traits, would you punish them for deviating from their chosen traits? If not, what would be the point of writing them down?
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 8:15PM
#37
|
|
|
You're not Chaotic Good. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else.
Alignment needs to die in a fire.
"You're not a Brony. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else."
"You're not a Human. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with two words, just like everybody else."
"You're not nice. You're a complex individual with a variety of motivations and behaviors that cannot be described with one word, just like everybody else."
Just because Chaotic Good isn't a full description doesn't mean it's not a description. If I describe someone as "friendly" that doesn't mean they have no other traits.
Win.
Fail. He is a brony, but it is one of his personality traits. Being a human has no effect on his motivations and behaviors. Nice is a trait.
However, chaotic good is a way a life, an alignment that shows your place in the cosmos acording to D&D mythos, the very expression of his personality.
CAN I HAZ DEPLOMAZ NOW?
Sorry, no. You failed.
You really think that being human has no effect on his motivations and behaviors in a fantasy setting with an abundance of races? Being human has a ton of effect on us in REAL life with regards to motivations and behaviors, and we don't have the pressure from other sentient races impacting us. Ever of hear of human rights? A lot of motivation going on in there.
Chaotic Good is not a way of life. It's an alignment. It is one piece of a large puzzle of a character. Kingreaper still nailed it.
Reflavoring: the change of flavor without changing any mechanical part of the game, no matter how small, in order to fit the mechanics to an otherwise unsupported concept.
Retexturing: the change of flavor (with at most minor mechanical adaptations) in order to effortlessly create support for a concept without inventing anything new.
Houseruling: the change, either minor or major, of the mechanics in order to better reflect a certain aspect of the game, including adapting the rules to fit an otherwise unsupported concept.
Homebrewing: the complete invention of something new that fits within the system in order to reflect an unsupported concept.
Default module =/= Core mechanic.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 8:19PM
#38
|
Date Joined:
Aug 31, 2008
|
Chaotic Good isn't even a partial description, because nobody knows what it means and nobody can agree on what behaviors or characters fit it. It's meaningless psychobabble, and instead we should actually write down words that actually MEAN SOMETHING on our character sheets to describe our character's personalities.
I know exactly what it means in the context of my campaigns.
Question: if players substituted alignment with personality traits, would you punish them for deviating from their chosen traits? If not, what would be the point of writing them down?
No, I would never punish a player (or penalize a character) for deviating from chosen traits (or alignment). Nor would I play with any DM who did so.
People are not robots: we act differently around different people, on different days, depending on how we are feeling, etc ad nauseum. People change over time based on their experiences.
The point of writing it down is to help the player get a sense of, in general, what their character is like. It isn't a model that must be followed to the letter every single time. And you certainly don't face punishment for deviating from your norm. And by this I'm referring to punishing the very act of deviation, rather than punishing the actual actions. For example, if I was playing a character who I desrcribed as nice and generous, but one day I stole some goods to keep for myself, I wouldn't expect the DM to punish me for deviating from my personality/alignment. But I would expect an in game consequence if my theft was discovered, because such an act was deemed illegal in the town.
This is why alignment should be separated from mechanics in its core form (such things can be added as modules for people who like it): alignment is simply another aspect of personality. It is a way to describe your general tendencies as an aid for roleplaying. It should be fluid, flexible, and easily changable over time in response to character growth and development, just like any other personality traits. It should be completely subjective at times, rather than always objective, as the concepts it covers involve too many shades of gray.
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 8:45PM
#39
|
Date Joined:
Aug 10, 2008
|
Another point I don't think I covered is the effect of the change in alignment rules in 4E on the cosmology. Entire Outer Planes were wiped out for no good reason, pretty much wrecking the Great Ring. Whole Planescape campaigns got thrown into a cocked hat for that nonsense...
|
|
|
|
1 year ago ::
Mar 25, 2012 - 9:15PM
#40
|
Date Joined:
Oct 26, 2004
|
You say that like it's a bad thing.
The great wheel created an incredibly stupid situation where despite the greater power and roughly equal number of the "good" aligned outsiders no progress was ever made. Neither good nor evil grew stronger or weaker in any significant fashion because the planes themselves were 'balanced'. 4e's cosmology is not fixed upon alignment and thus has the potential to become greater or lesser.
Divorcing alignment from mechanics allows more creativity, and prevents situations where the DM's philosophy is set against the players'. In real life for example any being who behaved the way any of the greek gods do would be considered an evil scuzzball. IS it ok for them to behave that way because they are gods? Or are the ones assigned non-evil alignments in Dieties and Demi-gods just typos?
Furthermore evertime you say x cannot be alignment y, it causes people to make a version of x that can be or can only be alignment y. The blackgaurd is a way for pallies to be evil. That's their only purpose, to maintain the so-called balance between the the alignments.
Just remove alignment from mechanics and you can use any system you want for it.
|
|
|
