Warning: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is deprecated, use preg_replace_callback instead in ..../includes/class_bbcode.php on line 2958
Alignment: Threat or Menace (The Alternatives Thread) - Page 3
Recent Chat Activity (Main Lobby)
Join Chat

Loading Chat Log...

Prefer not to see ads? Become a Community Supporter.
Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123
Results 31 to 36 of 36

Thread: Alignment: Threat or Menace (The Alternatives Thread)

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    West Jordan
    Posts
    5,273
    Blog Entries
    41
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    Prefer not to see ads?
    Become a Community Supporter.
    well, i think it is pretty apparent that "goods", "chaotics", "evils", "lawfuls" and "neutrals" don't work together be they same or different alignments. i have some lawful good characters that were acting perfectly lawful and good according to their beliefs, but get accused of not being such by other lawful good types who happen to follow different laws and a different view of good. alignment is only as restricting as the dm/player is lax. conflict between players and dm come when they didn't work it out ahead of time and bother to define which is what.
    nijineko the gm: AG16, CoS. nijineko the player: AtG, RttToH; . The Journal of Tala'elowar Kiyiik! .
    CrystalBallLite: the best dice roller on the planet! . nijineko the archivist: the 3.x archive

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Aug 2012
    Posts
    8
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    I know that's not really the case. I'm merely referring to some of my experiences with PC-based RPGs where, for some odd reason, everyone in (usually) the "Good" group were working together without any faction-shattering differences. There may be some tensions between nations or subfactions, but they always seem to work together against a common enemy. My problem with that is that it assumes that everyone will band together to fight the Evil Wizard. What if the Lawful Good Merchant decides that he thinks he could profit more by not involving himself in the war, and instead waiting until later to provide goods to either side. I agree with Tesral and others when they say that the Alignment mechanic might serve a purpose in the as-is D&D game, but is ultimately flawed as it adheres to too many assumptions.

    Someone else even mentioned that it is a bad idea to assume that the Evil Kingdom is the Evil Kingdom because the King is Evil. What if everyone else isn't?

    Now I realize that many players and DMs like the simplicity that a black and white system provides, and I'm even willing to play with this sort of system. However, I think I prefer the Alignment thing better if it applies only to extreme circumstances. For the most part, I feel that characters should have their own motivations, and that their "alignment" is primarily based on those motivations.

    Allegiances are always cool to bring into a game. Again, these should be a freeform sort of thing. The "Super Secret Council For Spying on the King's Enemies" could just as easily have psychopaths in addition to those loyal to the crown and/or humanity. Something like this seems more interesting to me, because the end result is the fact that a "Good" faction has Evil elements within it.

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Oct 2007
    Location
    Prattville
    Age
    55
    Posts
    853
    Blog Entries
    4
    Downloads
    5
    Uploads
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by nijineko View Post
    alignment is only as restricting as the dm/player is lax. conflict between players and dm come when they didn't work it out ahead of time and bother to define which is what.
    I really wish we had some sort of "Thumbs Up" feature on here. It really is all about communication - and if you fail to do it, you fail as a DM _or_ Player.

    Foehunter82, regarding your experience with everyone agreeing, it's because we tend to game with people in our own socio-economic and cultural world, so there are few people with outside guidance that can cause friction. We, as players, are similar, so our PC's are similar - no matter what we do. It's HARD to play a character that is highly different than we are as people!

    And the darned definitions are so squishy - at least as far as good/evil are considered. The law/chaos thing is pretty easy - you are either law abiding or you aren't. The good/evil thing can shift depending on your culture. At risk of breaking Godwin's Law, in WWII, the Allies believed that they were good and the Axis were evil... and the Axis thought THEY were good and the Allies were evil... and both groups were totally correct.

    Religion can be seen to give "good" morals... and that includes the people that feed thousands of homeless people and those that bomb abortion clinics - BOTH groups think they are doing "good" - and you can find people that agree with both of those ideologies. Liberals and Conservatives both believe that they do "good' and the other side does "evil" - and both are correct. This is why standards alignments don't work - because they are nothing but squishy.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Location
    West Jordan
    Posts
    5,273
    Blog Entries
    41
    Downloads
    2
    Uploads
    0
    unless there is an absolute moral and/or ethical principle in the universe, or even a law, just like gravity or electromagnetism.
    nijineko the gm: AG16, CoS. nijineko the player: AtG, RttToH; . The Journal of Tala'elowar Kiyiik! .
    CrystalBallLite: the best dice roller on the planet! . nijineko the archivist: the 3.x archive

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Phoenix
    Posts
    858
    Blog Entries
    1
    Downloads
    9
    Uploads
    0
    Compliments of dictionary.com:
    GOOD - adj -
    1.morally
    excellent; virtuous; righteous; pious: a good man.

    2.satisfactory in quality, quantity, or degree: a good teacher; good health.

    3.of high quality; excellent.

    4.right; proper; fit: It is good that you are here. His credentials are good.

    5.well-behaved: a good child.

    Do you see anything that's not subjective in there?

    Talk about alignment too long, and Nihilism will start to make sense.

    By the way, Malruhn, I like to think of Law as something beyond following laws. Let's throw Order and Predictability into its scope.
    Powered by: Modos RPG, version 1.30
    http://modos-rpg.obsidianportal.com/

  6. #36
    Join Date
    Dec 2015
    Location
    Poughkeepsie
    Posts
    3
    Downloads
    0
    Uploads
    0
    Oh, I am so late to the thread. But, I will still put in my 2 coppers.

    In my gaming circle, there are multiple DMs, each having their own game. Our "main" DM, the one who first ran the game that brought us all together, is the defacto leader, and she got rid of alignments decades ago. We have no "Know Alignment" spell, nor Alignment Languages. But the system we run, we cll The Consequence System. Just like RL, most people *think* they are decent, "good" people. Our DM often throws things at us that make us choose between many "gray-area" choices, and we must simply deal with the consequences of our actions. Not in a "is this in accordance with my Alignment", which tome is so Meta it hurts my brain, but in a way I can intuit, and we players use our minds to extrapolate the consequences...or go with our instinctual passions and let the Cards of Fate fall where they may! *lol*

    With religion, our gods have certain "spheres of influence" (and some overlap) that show us their *general* tendencies along the good/evil and law/chaos axis. And there are some that can be quite surprising: a druid of a god of fire, chaos and change (uses fire as a renewal tool for the land, to drive out humans from protected lands, etc.), or a druid of a god of law (exterminating invasive species, or unnatural animals taking over the area), or a cleric of the goddess of war as a primary healer versed in medical procedures as well as magical healing (can you say war-time battlefield medic?).

    But consequences are a MUCH more transparent & instinctual way for moral compasses to function, IMHO. Merely get in character, and then PLAY that character fully. Or am I looking at this in a too simplistic way?

Page 3 of 3 FirstFirst 123

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •