|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 10:14AM
#1
|
|
|
I have seen 1000's of posts worth of discussion about the alignment systems and whether or nor they work, so I wanted to add a poll for the people here to see at a glance what the general consensus is: just the numbers, none of the arguments please, there are other threads for reading the specific arguments.
A character sheet is a player's love letter to the DM. If someone wants to do something and they want to do it well, let them. Encourage them. Have fun with it. -Unknown
An adventure is a DM's love letter to the players. If the DM wants something to happen in the game, let it. Encourage the DM. Have fun with it. -Centauri I'd love for input as to what it should be rather than arguments against why I shouldn't have it at all. -lialwyn Best defense that I've read in favor of having alignment systems as an option
Spoiler:
Show
However, if some people are heavily benefiting from the inclusion of alignment, then it would behoove those that AREN'T to listen up and pay attention to how those benefits are being created and enjoyed, no? -YagamiFire
But equally important would be for those who do enjoy those benefits to entertain the possibility that other people do not value those benefits equally or, possibly, do not see them as benefits in the first place. -wrecan
That makes sense. However, it is not fair to continually attack those that benefit for being, somehow, deviant for deriving enjoyment from something that you cannot. Instead, alignment is continually attacked...it is demonized...and those that use it are lumped in with it.
I think there is more merit in a situation where someone says "This doesn't work! It's broken!" and the reply is "Actually it works fine for me. Have you considered your approach might be causing it?" than a situation where someone says "I use this system and the way I use it works really well!" and the back and forth is "No! It is a broken bad system!" because the former posits that improvement could be made...the latter only undermines the enjoyment of the person who is using alignment. -YagamiFire
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 10:26AM
#2
|
Date Joined:
Sep 18, 2012
|
This is going to turn into yet another pointless alignment debate...
Gunmage, a homebrew arcane striker. (Heroic Tier playtest ready.) GDocs link. (More up to date.)
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 12:38PM
#3
|
|
|
Impossible to answer because it depends on the system, Allignment is really only as good as it's mechanical value within that system. 3.5 edition's allignment system wouldn't work in 4th edition, nor could you dump 3.5's allignment without retooling the existing allignment mechanics, which would be a completely pointless endevour.
And you really can't ditch a core mechanic out of any system. So what system are you asking about? 5th? I am really more interested in how it's other systems work then somethign as trivial as allignment.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 2:07PM
#4
|
Date Joined:
Jun 20, 2012
|
I polled. Still wanted to add my two coppers. Just because something sounds like a good idea, doesn't make it one... even if there's concensus.
A rogue with a bowl of slop can be a controller.
WIZARD PC: Can I substitute Celestial Roc Guano for my fireball spells?
DM: Awesome. Yes.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 2:10PM
#5
|
Date Joined:
Oct 24, 2012
|
I polled. Still wanted to add my two coppers. Just because something sounds like a good idea, doesn't make it one... even if there's concensus.
I would make the same statement about alignment, except it's not a good idea. You can do without it... just give it a try!
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 6:07PM
#6
|
|
|
My issue with a lack of alignment is that it requires the characters actions to define their intentions.
Those actions can be interpreted in various ways and can lead to arguments and problems.
For example a character who sneaks into a cavern filled with Orcs and kills them while they sleep would be considered what by you?
Does the DM ask for the reasoning of a action?
Does someone who is better at creating a argument to valadate the action be allowed to do it? Does someone who is not get punished?
Dungeons and Dragons generally speaking are about heroic characters saving the day.
I've been playing Role-playing games for over 20 years and recently I had to end a Mutant's & Masterminds game due to arguements about what is heroic and good and what isn't.
Never had that problem with Dungeons and Dragons, alignment keeps some people in check. But it doesn't mean everyone has this problem.
I've seen players do the crazest things due to thier interpretation of alignment. I've seen adventurers use gease fight for them, saving opponents from other players, and characters talk their opponents before the last big encounter actually starts.
Alignments can be a role-playing tool, or it can be a punishment, it all depends on how you look at it.
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 09, 2013 - 8:01PM
#7
|
Date Joined:
Jul 21, 2004
|
My issue with a lack of alignment is that it requires the characters actions to define their intentions.
Why do we need their intentions defined? Are we to tell people "no" if we don't like their intentions?
Those actions can be interpreted in various ways and can lead to arguments and problems.
So can alignment.
For example a character who sneaks into a cavern filled with Orcs and kills them while they sleep would be considered what by you?
Overly cautious, but what I consider them to be does not matter.
Does the DM ask for the reasoning of a action?
Of course not.
Does someone who is better at creating a argument to valadate the action be allowed to do it? Does someone who is not get punished?
No. Anyone is allowed to do it, and while there may be interesting consequences from their actions, no one is ever punished. What on earth would punishment accomplish?
Dungeons and Dragons generally speaking are about heroic characters saving the day.
Or mercenary characters out for themselves. Conan, Fafhrd, and the Grey Mouser were also inspirations for the game.
I've been playing Role-playing games for over 20 years and recently I had to end a Mutant's & Masterminds game due to arguements about what is heroic and good and what isn't.
Why would anyone care enough to wreck a game over it?
Never had that problem with Dungeons and Dragons, alignment keeps some people in check. But it doesn't mean everyone has this problem.
Enough people do.
I've seen players do the crazest things due to thier interpretation of alignment. I've seen adventurers use gease fight for them, saving opponents from other players, and characters talk their opponents before the last big encounter actually starts.
Some people think alignment excuses jerky or silly behavior. Some people think they HAVE to be jerky or silly, or risk having their alignment changed. That's not the case, but it's easy to reach such a conclusion.
Alignments can be a role-playing tool, or it can be a punishment, it all depends on how you look at it.
It's very easily understood to be a way to control people and a reason to punish them if they buck that control. Clarify that problem away, or ditch alignment.
[N]o difference is less easily overcome than the difference of opinion about semi-abstract questions. - L. Tolstoy
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 10, 2013 - 12:07AM
#8
|
Date Joined:
Jun 19, 2004
|
/input my problem with the other copy of this thread in here.
Currently working on making a Dex based defender. Check it out hereSpoiler:
Show
Need a few pre-generated characters for a one-shot you are running? Want to get a baseline for what an effective build for a class you aren't familiar with? Check out the Pregen thread here
If ever you are interested what it sounds like to be at my table check out my blog and podcast here
Also, I've recently done an episode on "Refluffing". You can check that out here
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 10, 2013 - 1:07AM
#9
|
|
|
Why do we need their intentions defined? Are we to tell people "no" if we don't like their intentions?
Intentions lead to a final action. Although there are plenty of games that don't have alignment, they do have a way for a player to show the path the character wants to take. Exalted, L5R, Vampire the Masquerade, all have ways for a character to either build the moraility that can be determined by the GM or have a long term goal to strive for.
So can alignment.
I agree 100% I've seen, discussed, and argued on alignment actions in game and out of game. I like these discussions but I've found most don't so I usually respect their wishes.
No. Anyone is allowed to do it, and while there may be interesting consequences from their actions, no one is ever punished. What on earth would punishment accomplish?
Consequences can be seen as a form of punishment by some.
Or mercenary characters out for themselves. Conan, Fafhrd, and the Grey Mouser were also inspirations for the game.
True. But characters like Conan usually do what are considered good things. In 4e the characters are described in the PHB has Heroes. Although characters can interpret that as they wish.
Why would anyone care enough to wreck a game over it?
In that particular games it had to do with the individual player's view of right and wrong, and the morality of their actions.
That game they were playing superheroes and they each had different opinions of what heroes should act like. One player decided to do something that many of the other players didn't see as a heroic action. The action had consequences in game but many of the characters became to mistrust that character. Discussions became arguments and in the end the characters decided to dispand their group.
In that game its foundation was build on what was considered moral and heroic actions. As the GM of that game I just tried to keep the game together but in the end it was the players who had the problems.
Enough people do.
True enough, and there are many RPGs in which alignment is not an issue.
Some people think alignment excuses jerky or silly behavior. Some people think they HAVE to be jerky or silly, or risk having their alignment changed. That's not the case, but it's easy to reach such a conclusion.
I have played in games with that problem. Both characters of good and evil alignment are subject to this. Its the players intrepretations of what they beleive that cause the issue.
It's very easily understood to be a way to control people and a reason to punish them if they buck that control. Clarify that problem away, or ditch alignment.
Depends on your views, alignment can be seen as a form of control or as a guideline. This depends on the DM in question. I tend to be very loose with alignment but there are exceptions.
For example, a player who wishes to play a Paladin on a Lawful Good Diety for purposes of the powers of the diety I beleive should act acordingly.
In L5R a character with a high honor rating is "punished" by losing honor for dishonorable actions depending on his Clan. In Vampire it was your humanity score.
In the end if you have players and a DM who don't have a problem with ignoring alignment then its fine. But in games such as LFR is seen as a prevention of players simply performing what could be considered "villainous" actions against other players.
In the end its about the fun of EVERYONE. The question is does alignment do more harm than good for everyone and what are the postive and negative effects of removing it?
|
|
|
|
5 months ago ::
Jan 10, 2013 - 6:28AM
#10
|
|
|
The guy who sneaks in and kills all the Orcs in their sleep would be considered both smart and skilled.
I've had over 2 decades of experience playing, and my groups have never had an issue over allignment, but that is probably because I don't hang around people who have trouble distinguishing between good and evil. I imagine that if I had friends who were sociopaths and were dumb enough to let them in my house instead of locking the door, I might have allignment issues.
The fact of the matter is most issues with allignment that I have ever heard of (but never seen in real life) have less to nothing to do with allignment and more to do with a problem with that person.
The CN person who goes into battle swinging a fish in a serious game while spouting that he is a teapot, turns and attacks his own group randomly, because Chaotic amIright? This has nothing to do with allignment, the problem is the player is an immature moron. Solution is not to drop allignment, it's to drop him off at the park on the way home and leave him there.
The CN player who uses that allignment as an excuse for meyhem, murder and destruction and who is actually just CE? Again the problem is not allignment, and it isn't fixed by changing his allignment or forcing his allignment, the problem is that he is an immature asshat. If you think he is going to stop being an immatue asshat because you ditched allignment then you are in for a suprise.
DM railroads your character with allignment, says You can't sneak in and kill the evil orcs in their sleep? Well that DM is running a Rail Road with iron tracks and a tight schedual. He is going to Rail Road you anyways. The Orcs will sleep in full armor with weapons ready, the first one you off will Scream and wake the rest, your sneak rolls will fial regardless of how high you roll, he will simply add another room full of armed orcs.....HE WILL RAILROAD YOU!
Because the problem isn't the alignment system, it is the Rail Roading DM, and he doesn't need allignments to railroad you.
|
|
|
