|
9 months ago ::
Sep 24, 2012 - 8:50PM
#21
|
|
|
DM "Thats it, your alignment is now TN"
You "OK."*continues to play the character the exact same way.*
If the DM changes your alignment how much does it really change anything?
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I'm with on this alignment thing right up until you said the DM changes my alignment to Tennessee. Nobody does that to me. Nobody.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 24, 2012 - 9:03PM
#22
|
|
|
But I like it for RP purposes only, not mechanics. In other words, (in my opinion) your character's alignment is between you and your character; the DM and the rulebooks should not be involved.
I could get behind that sentiment. Alignment itself isn't what bothers me, but how people treat it. That, and the existance of spells such as Protection From Evil/Good/Law/Chaos just plain don't work with a subjective system like alignment.
In fact, in games I've played in where the DM forced me to take an alignment, I pretty much always opted for Unaligned. Why? Unaligned is described as choosing to be outside the normal alignment system, which is exactly the sort of stance nearly every character I make would take. "What society views as good or evil doesn't matter. The only person I have to justify my actions to is myself." Then I would look at every choice presented to the character not as choosing good or evil, law or chaos, but instead as a choice of "Would my character consider this action right or wrong?" The only standard to consider was the character's own moral code, which is something I try to have a solid grasp on.
The one time I actually played a Good character (Because I reasoned that the character, being a member of the army, would be concerned about the society's moral stance as much as her own) I got called out - in and out of character - for a few actions. The party, while tracking down a group of orcs, came upon a group of dwarves that had been massacred. The rest of the party felt that we should stop to burn and bury the dead. My character objected, insisting that they had to continue: Their goal was to stop the orcs, preferably before they had time to kill anyone else.
The other characters (and a few of the players) insisted that the Good thing to do was to give them a proper burial. My justification for my character's actions was that it was still Good... Because she was thinking in the long term. Yes, it would be good in the eyes of society to grant the dwarves a proper burial. But every wasted minute was another minute the orcs would be getting further away. The greater good would be to stop them before they caused the death of more innocents.
...Which is why I don't bother putting Good on my character sheet anymore. It's just easier to justify my actions with "My character feels this is the better course of action. Oh, look, I'm unaligned." Rather than get into a long debate over whether or not my character's actions are Good.
I don't even put any alignment down. If the DM asks me what my alignment is, I say 'You tell me, 'cause I don't care'.
Another day, another three or four entries to my Ignore List.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 24, 2012 - 9:07PM
#23
|
Date Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
|
I don't even put any alignment down. If the DM asks me what my alignment is, I say 'You tell me, 'cause I don't care'.
I'm compelled to fill in every section on the character sheet. In games where alignment doesn't matter, I'll use a txt or rtf file for the sheet and remove the Alignment entry entirely.
Seriously, when I'm filling in a form, I have to put something down. Usually a question mark, if I'm planning on going back and filling it out later.
No, I have no idea why.
Gunmage, a homebrew arcane striker. (Heroic Tier playtest ready.) GDocs link. (More up to date.)
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 7:50AM
#24
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
Pick two words you feel best describe your character, from the whole of language, and write those in your alignment box instead 
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 7:53AM
#25
|
|
|
DM "Thats it, your alignment is now TN"
You "OK."*continues to play the character the exact same way.*
If the DM changes your alignment how much does it really change anything?
Mechanical penalties. Loss of XP, including levels, depending on edition. Affected differently by different spells and magical effects. Gain/lose the ability to use various magical items. Prevented from gaining levels in a class, or forced to change classes, or lose class features. There's a good reason why mechanical effects from Alignment is a bad rule and only bad systems use it, but if you're playing in a bad system then yes, it can matter.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 8:15AM
#26
|
Date Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
|
Pick two words you feel best describe your character, from the whole of language, and write those in your alignment box instead
My favorite PC, a wizard: Moderately psychotic.
Not in the traditional 'chaotic stupid' method, but in the sense of has genuine mental problems. She had an easier time related to a lich than (relatively) normal people of her own species, after all.
The last PC I played before the wizard: Frequent defenestrator.
That was (almost) the character's entire (mechanical) function: Grab things, throw them out windows.
But in actuality, I think "describe them in two words" is horribly simplifying their personalities. There were layers involved. Even if some of those layers were "Still finds the concept of cities fascinating."
Whoa, whoa, whoa. I'm with on this alignment thing right up until you said the DM changes my alignment to Tennessee. Nobody does that to me. Nobody.
Well, the alternative is naming the alignment Neutral Neutral, but then everyone would mistake it for an N2 mine, and that just leads to more problems then it's worth.
...I felt I should add that, because the reference may put some of my above comments in context.
Gunmage, a homebrew arcane striker. (Heroic Tier playtest ready.) GDocs link. (More up to date.)
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 9:03AM
#27
|
Date Joined:
Oct 28, 2010
|
But in actuality, I think "describe them in two words" is horribly simplifying their personalities. There were layers involved. Even if some of those layers were "Still finds the concept of cities fascinating."
Which just goes to illustrate the problems with alignment as a system
I only suggested two words because it've a very small box. Realistically, I tend to write and play from character descriptions, histories and motivations. How my characters react and interact is flexible and situational.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 12:59PM
#28
|
Date Joined:
Nov 30, 2005
|
Mechanical penalties. Loss of XP, including levels, depending on edition. Affected differently by different spells and magical effects. Gain/lose the ability to use various magical items. Prevented from gaining levels in a class, or forced to change classes, or lose class features.
There's a good reason why mechanical effects from Alignment is a bad rule and only bad systems use it, but if you're playing in a bad system then yes, it can matter.
I always forget people don't house rule this BS out. If none of these circumstances apply to you, let the DM change it and who cares. If they do, argue endlessly with your DM, call them names, and then storm out in a fit.
5e comments and thoughts all in one place. Check it out to provide feedback, mock, or steal ideas.
http://community.wizards.com/go/thread/view/75882/28835423/Krusks_5e_Design_Goals?sdb=1
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 1:01PM
#29
|
|
|
Mechanical penalties. Loss of XP, including levels, depending on edition. Affected differently by different spells and magical effects. Gain/lose the ability to use various magical items. Prevented from gaining levels in a class, or forced to change classes, or lose class features.
There's a good reason why mechanical effects from Alignment is a bad rule and only bad systems use it, but if you're playing in a bad system then yes, it can matter.
I always forget people don't house rule this BS out.
Many people do. However, we've established in advance, here, that this DM *does* care about the alignment on your sheet, which by definition means he's got mechanics hanging off it. If none of these circumstances apply to you, let the DM change it and who cares. If they do, argue endlessly with your DM, call them names, and then storm out in a fit.
Or just quit and play a game that isn't terrible, BEFORE drama.
|
|
|
|
9 months ago ::
Sep 25, 2012 - 10:49PM
#30
|
|
|
I don't even put any alignment down. If the DM asks me what my alignment is, I say 'You tell me, 'cause I don't care'.
This is ok if your character concept isn't allignment dependent, like say 3.5's Paladin which has to be Lawful Good, or if your character isn't Evil, then you would probably be best to jusy mark Neutral on your sheet and be done with it. Most people should probably be Neutral unless they decide to really commit one way or the other,
However I would say to those opposed to the allignment system, as well as to those who over define it, that allignment was never intended to be a straightjacket or to represent extreme behaviors and ideals. There is however a legit mechanical benifit from allignment in a game that is Hero's vs Evil at it's core. Good vs Evil is not a subjective value when there are literally Evil Monsters/Undead running about with Heros literally blessed and powered by holy dieties fighting them and the allignment axis reflect this.
The Lawful Good Paladin using Detect Evil to locate and then Smite Evil upon the Chaotic Evil undead vampire is a perfect example of why the allignment system works, the Paladin is in fact Good and the Vampire is in fact Evil. There are beings that are good, beings that are evil and beings that are pure chaos as well as Law
|
|
|
