Good and Evil - a Troperiffic Alignment System

[Ialdabaoth]

So, I'm contemplating an alignment system based on common media tropes:

A character's alignment is determined by a 'Karma' rating. Positive Karma means you are "good", and angels, holy beings, and holy powers will register you as an "ally", while demons, unholy beings, and evil powers will register as an "enemy". Positive Karma also means that, whenever you perform any action, the random side-effects of your actions will tend to play out in a way that help people, in proportion to how positive your Karma is. Negative Karma means you are "evil", and demons/unholy beings/etc. will consider you an "ally", while angels/holy beings/etc. will consider you an "enemy". It also means that, whenever you perform an action, it will tend to turn out in such a way that people get hurt, in proportion to how negative your Karma is.

So, here's how Karma works:

1. Beauty Equals Goodness (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Quotes/BeautyEqualsGoodness) - whenever positive things happen around you, you may make a Sense Motive check; if you succeed, you add your Charisma modifier to your Karma. (Yes, if your Charisma modifier is negative, this means that you get MORE evil, the more good things happen around you.)

2. Brains: Evil, Brawn: Good (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BrainsEvilBrawnGood) - whenever negative things happen around you, you may make a Sense Motive check; if you succeed, you subtract your Intelligence modifier from your Karma. (Same deal - if your Intelligence modifier is negative, you become MORE good the more bad things happen around you.)

3. You can "Spend" Karma in a manner reminiscent of the old D6 Star Wars' Force Points/Dark Side Points - if you have positive Karma, you can spend 10 Karma to boost any particularly heroic action, while if you have negative Karma, you can spend -10 Karma to boost any particularly villainous action.

4. Whenever you achieve a "critical success" on your Sense Motive check, you get to choose the direction that you add Karma.

5. Characters will roll 3d6, in order, for their Ability scores; they will NOT be informed of what their scores are.

6. Players will not be allowed to play characters with "evil" motivations - they must try to do good.

[PlusSixPelican]

So...you're valuing stupidity and beauty over intelligence and character as good? *sigh*

Also: Why no evil PCs?

[vasharanpaladin]

...You realize, of course, that this makes just about anything with SLA's and especially most aberrations and DEVILS are the greatest forces of Good in the setting, yes? :smalltongue:

[Ialdabaoth]

So...you're valuing stupidity and beauty over intelligence and character as good? *sigh*

Also: Why no evil PCs?

Because it's supposed to be a way to bludgeon intelligent do-gooders into having everything they ever try to accomplish go horrifically wrong, and then make them feel awful about it - while holding up photogenic idiots as paragons of virtue to remind them that perception is more important than consequence, and that the Gods Don't Care.

[Doorhandle]

Because it's supposed to be a way to bludgeon intelligent do-gooders into having everything they ever try to accomplish go horrifically wrong, and then make them feel awful about it - while holding up photogenic idiots as paragons of virtue to remind them that perception is more important than consequence, and that the Gods Don't Care.

Sounds rather bitter and twisted. I kinda like it...

[GnomeGninjas]

So, I'm contemplating an alignment system based on common media tropes:

A character's alignment is determined by a 'Karma' rating. Positive Karma means you are "good", and angels, holy beings, and holy powers will register you as an "ally", while demons, unholy beings, and evil powers will register as an "enemy". Positive Karma also means that, whenever you perform any action, the random side-effects of your actions will tend to play out in a way that help people, in proportion to how positive your Karma is. Negative Karma means you are "evil", and demons/unholy beings/etc. will consider you an "ally", while angels/holy beings/etc. will consider you an "enemy". It also means that, whenever you perform an action, it will tend to turn out in such a way that people get hurt, in proportion to how negative your Karma is.

So, here's how Karma works:

1. Beauty Equals Goodness (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Quotes/BeautyEqualsGoodness) - whenever positive things happen around you, you may make a Sense Motive check; if you succeed, you add your Charisma modifier to your Karma. (Yes, if your Charisma modifier is negative, this means that you get MORE evil, the more good things happen around you.)

2. Brains: Evil, Brawn: Good (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BrainsEvilBrawnGood) - whenever negative things happen around you, you may make a Sense Motive check; if you succeed, you subtract your Intelligence modifier from your Karma. (Same deal - if your Intelligence modifier is negative, you become MORE good the more bad things happen around you.)

3. You can "Spend" Karma in a manner reminiscent of the old D6 Star Wars' Force Points/Dark Side Points - if you have positive Karma, you can spend 10 Karma to boost any particularly heroic action, while if you have negative Karma, you can spend -10 Karma to boost any particularly villainous action.

4. Whenever you achieve a "critical success" on your Sense Motive check, you get to choose the direction that you add Karma.

5. Characters will roll 3d6, in order, for their Ability scores; they will NOT be informed of what their scores are.

6. Players will not be allowed to play characters with "evil" motivations - they must try to do good.

Why don't you know your scores? That makes building a character practicly impossible. What is the DC for the sense motive check.

Also if there is a really agressive bear that spends it life breaking things and killing people it will become really really good because whenever it kills someone and passes the sense motive it will fail the int check and get a higher karma.

[Fawriel]

The thread title did not make me expect something this depressing.

[Visivicous]

If it was like this IRL, I guess I would be Hitler. I'm not very pleasant to look at :smallfrown: .

[AuraTwilight]

This is the dumbest morality system I've ever seen. It insults the term "Troperiffic", since these two tropes basically never go together, ever.

[GnomeGninjas]

If it was like this IRL, I guess I would be Hitler. I'm not very pleasant to look at :smallfrown: .

Godwin'd? Allready? On this forum it usally takes severalpages before Hitler is mentioned.

[Yitzi]

I suppose this could be a good system for a game that's designed to parody stupid assumptions found in certain types of media...it is not well-suited to most games, though, and especially not heroic fantasy (the sort that tends to use alignment in the first place.)

[Madara]

Sounds rather bitter and twisted. I kinda like it...

I kinda want to sig this. May I?

[TuggyNE]

I gotta be honest, I was expecting a much more generic and widely-usable system from the title, and the first paragraph. But the rest of it makes it only work for certain narrow and unusual assumptions, so ... congrats on getting a particular feel working that I would never want to play? No offense, I'm just not sure how to evaluate how good this is, when its apparent basis is so vastly different from my usual....

I do have two comments, though. First, skill checks do not have critical successes, so if you want to keep that mechanic you'll have to add a definition for that. Second, I have no idea why there's a restriction on not playing Evil characters; at most, that should be a DM's restriction for a given campaign. And, especially given the grimdark implications of the rest of it, it seems entirely out of place.

... and now I'm reconsidering whether you actually intended to make it so, er, Unfortunate Implications-y. If you didn't, then I can definitely say it needs a good bit of work.

[NosferatuZodd]

I don't see why everyone is surprised that this is a very bad morality system just because it had "Troperiffic" in the title.

That's a dead give-away that it's terrible.

[Ialdabaoth]

To clarify:

It is intended to be nothing *BUT* Unfortunate Implications.

[TuggyNE]

To clarify:

It is intended to be nothing *BUT* Unfortunate Implications.

Then, good sir or madam, you have succeeded admirably. I guess?

[AuraTwilight]

If it's nothing but Unfortunate Implications, then what's the point of it? Who's going to use this and what for?

Because there's more effective "morality is a sham" systems out there.

[dragonjek]

But... this doesn't cover deconstructions and subversions of the tropes involved!

What about other tropes?

Good Colors, Evil Colors! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodColorsEvilColors) Wear black, and you're evil (let's not look at Luke Skywalker in the Return of the Jedi). Wear white, and you're good (we're ignoring you, Kimbley from Fullmetal Alchemist).

Be bald (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BaldOfEvil) or have a beard (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BeardOfEvil) and you are on a one-way path to hell! Watch that hair, boys!

How about Beauty is Bad (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BeautyIsBad)? Oh. But, you already have Beauty Equals Goodness. Hm... Beauty Equals Neutrality? At least we have Evil is Sexy (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/EvilIsSexy).

Remember, Good is stupid! (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodIsDumb) ... Oh. Wait. I thought that Good is Not Dumb (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/GoodIsNotDumb).

[Leliel]

I don't see why everyone is surprised that this is a very bad morality system just because it had "Troperiffic" in the title.

That's a dead give-away that it's terrible.

Whereas this is a dead giveaway you aren't confident in your literary skills and and have a pathological need to put down an easy target that never claims to be a good basis for fiction and in fact emphasizes that in the "how to write fiction" sections in order to shore up your own fragile ego. Especially given how the very point of this alignment system is to mock how shallow alignment systems can be, and it uses TV Tropes to show the shallow nature of those particular tropes, being able to describe them in catchy phrases.

Seriously, threadcrap != cool. Go away.

As for the OP-I like it, for a comedy game from the perspective of the Designated Antagonists. Make it clear that the more one examines the gods' ideas of alignment, the more it becomes obvious that they have not a clue what they are doing. In fact, it's quite possible that the gods are quite honestly insane where they aren't outright evil manipulators making the chaff dance to their strings, with the sane and honest gods, both good and bad, serving as the "sealed ancient and mighty evil that, incidentally, the mentors never adequately explain how the release of would be bad for the world."

EDIT: Also, don't call it Tropperiffic. Tropperific is when the cliches are done right to the point where they aren't cliches. Call it a Cliche Storm.

[NosferatuZodd]

{{scrubbed}}

[Ialdabaoth]

EDIT: Also, don't call it Tropperiffic. Tropperific is when the cliches are done right to the point where they aren't cliches. Call it a Cliche Storm.

Indeed, "Cliche Storm" is a far better label for what I'm going for - I want reasonable people in a horrifically unreasonable world, that is unreasonable because the Gods watch way too much American television.

[Amechra]

Troper found.

Just because I hate the autism fields that is TV Tropes doesn't mean i'm "not confident in my literary skills".

Honestly, this is why SA always makes fun of this place and TV tropes.

And why do you feel the need to try to play internet psychologist to an apparent thread****? It doesn't make you cool, just makes you look more like a sperglord.

And why do you care?

All that TVTropes does is basically a ground-up look at various well known story themes from the point of view of people who don't actually study that kinda thing.

It has catchy names. We are, due to certain parts of our psychology, more likely to remember "Brains: Evil, Brawn: Good" than the actual name for the concept (though, funnily enough, Isaac Asimov has an excellent article where he takes a look at that very concept.)

That's basically all that site does. It is not something worthy of adulation or hate. It simply is.

That being said, I can see this being used as part of a comedy game; because alignment doesn't work, due to the entire concept of people falling neatly into a square of boxes is inherently silly.

At least this is honest in being just horrible ramifications all the way down.

(This explains, though, why orcs are "evil." And you forgot that whole "Evil is Sexy" thing that apparently is also a trope.)

[Leliel]

Troper found.

Just because I hate the autism fields that is TV Tropes doesn't mean i'm "not confident in my literary skills".

Honestly, this is why SA always makes fun of this place and TV tropes.

And why do you feel the need to try to play internet psychologist to an apparent thread****? It doesn't make you cool, just makes you look more like a sperglord.

No, it means your post has been reported for using a major learning disability as a cheap insult against a site you don't like, along with a very hurtful insult against me, specifically, by marginalizing a neurological disorder WHICH I HAVE BEEN ACTUALLY DIAGNOSED WITH, HAVE BEEN ON MEDICATION FOR, AND DO NOT USE AS AN EXCUSE FOR SOCIAL DIFFICULTIES!

Also, Something Awful bans people like you. I know, I like their columns.

Self-righteous troll.

[Roland St. Jude]

Sheriff: Locked for review.