Dynamic D&D alignment rules

[Grod_The_Giant]

Note: "Order" replaces "Law" in an attempt to linguistically mitigate the "Lawful Stupid" problem. These do rely heavily on DM fiat, so may not be suitable for all (read: immature) groups.

Alignment

Most actions in D&D can be viewed as support one of four grand cosmic principles: Good, Evil, Order, or Chaos. Characters have scores representing their affinity towards each principle, starting at zero (no affinity). As they grow in age and experience, their actions add to their scores.

Upon character creation, player characters begin with six alignment points to distribute between the four principles however they choose. In addition, for every age category above adult, they have an additional two alignment points. Characters created above first level gain an additional one alignment point for every four character levels they possess.

The main means of gaining alignment points, however, is through a character's actions. Whenever a character makes a choice which strongly aligns with one of the four principles, the DM assigns that character an alignment point to place in the appropriate principle.

Alignment points should only be awarded for major choices-- helping an old woman across the street is a good act, but not necessarily a Good one. What exactly constitutes a major choice depends at least partly on the player's level. A level two fighter unseating a particularly strict town council is a Chaotic act worthy of an alignment point, but a level ten fighter doing the same thing is not. As a general rule, alignment points only should be awarded for acts which require a non-trivial amount of game-play to achieve.

When the principle of an act is in question, the DM is the ultimate arbitrator. Groups should agree beforehand on whether intentions or results should be weighted more heavily when determining how alignment points should be assigned.

Alignment Scores and Game Effects

When calculating spells and effects that depend on alignment, a character's alignment is considered to be whichever score is highest. This is referred to as his primary alignment. If none of his alignment scores are over 5 points, his primary alignment is Neutral.

If a character has at least 10 points in his primary alignment score, and no other alignment is within 5 points of his primary alignment, he gains the appropriate subtype (Good, Evil, Order, or Chaos).

Neutralizing

If a character has a roughly equal number of alignment points in either his Order and Chaos scores or his Good and Evil scores, he may chose to "neutralize" his principles, subtracting an equal number of points from each. He may do so at any time.

[erikun]

How do Detect Evil and similar spells work in this system?
How do Protection from Evil and similar spells work in this system?
How do Holy weapons and similar effects work in this system?

The Neutralizing effect brings up some odd questions. If Detect Evil detects anyone over, say, 10 Evilness, then that means someone with 10 Good/10 Evil/10 Order would ping on the spell one minute and then drop off the radar by neutralizing at any time.

[Grod_The_Giant]

"When calculating spells and effects that depend on alignment, a character's alignment is considered to be whichever score is highest." So if you have Good 3, Order 5, Chaos 4, and Evil 6, you'd ping as evil, and be affected by detect evil, protection from evil, holy weapons and the like.

The idea with Neutralizing is that you'd do it frequently, so that you don't wind up with Good 10/Evil 10/Order 10/Chaos 10.

[erikun]

The idea with Neutralizing is that you'd do it frequently, so that you don't wind up with Good 10/Evil 10/Order 10/Chaos 10.
Why would I?
I mean, if I had Good 3/ Order 5/ Chaos 4/ Evil 6 then while I would ping as Evil for any spells and effects. However, I could easily Neutralize down to Order at any point I wanted, when it would be convenient to do so.

[Grod_The_Giant]

Mmm, yeah. Perhaps it'd be better to ditch the neutralizing idea and only give a neutral alignment if all of your individual alignment scores are within, say, 2 points of each other.

[toapat]

Mmm, yeah. Perhaps it'd be better to ditch the neutralizing idea and only give a neutral alignment if all of your individual alignment scores are within, say, 2 points of each other.

ive considered the scorecard idea, while it is nice, and alot better at showing where someone's alignment is at any one given time, it doesnt change the fact that:

A: people view Alignment as anything more then a cosmic Poker table with forces no mortal can comprehend
B: The Lawful-Chaotic axis is rather badly defined. really it should be Follows their code to the letter/Has a Framework they live within, not Honorable/Scoundrel (insult)

[Grod_The_Giant]

A: people view Alignment as anything more then a cosmic Poker table with forces no mortal can comprehend
I'm... not quite sure what you mean by that.


B: The Lawful-Chaotic axis is rather badly defined. really it should be Follows their code to the letter/Has a Framework they live within, not Honorable/Scoundrel (insult)
Alignment is more about how your actions impact others, methinks. Law/Order is "actions that promote stability," Chaos is "actions that promote anarchy."

[toapat]

I'm... not quite sure what you mean by that.


Alignment is more about how your actions impact others, methinks. Law/Order is "actions that promote stability," Chaos is "actions that promote anarchy."

1: basically sit Absolute Good, Absolute Evil, Absolute Law, Lawful Good, Lawful Evil, Chaotic Good, and Chaotic Evil at a poker table. Absolute Chaos is the dealer/house. There are no chips, just souls of mortals. Your actions are the bets, and each win redistributes the pool

2: Also true.

[Kane0]

If this helps at all, In the game I am currently running (Planescape):

"Alignment is special in this game. For a mortal, it is a rough indication of their overall disposition and in conjunction with their actual personality describes how the character acts. It is flexible and can change on how the character behaves. For an extreme example, if you use Detect Evil as your only justification to kill, the response may not be what you would expect. Alternatively saving a bunch of children for motives that are not innately selfish in origin nets you good points if you are evil.
Immortals such as outsiders and gods embody at least one aspect of their respective alignments, and it is set in much harder stone than mortals. You will not often find Devils helping you out without furthering their own agenda.
Alignment plays a important part in the multiverse, as you will notice as your travel across the outer planes."

In summary:
For the average mortal, your alignment is a general representation of your attitude towards Order/Chaos and Good/Evil. It is as fluid as the characters personality and decisions/actions.
For an extraplanar entity, these concepts are a way of life and cannot be changed nearly as freely. Literally, if you live in the outer planes.

Note: When I refer to 'good points', I mean that if you continually perform acts that are directly contrary to your alignment it will shift accordingly. The bigger the act, the more you slide along the alignment chart. This is done by the DM and usually happens only after the reasoning behind the act is given.

[Grod_The_Giant]

In summary:
For the average mortal, your alignment is a general representation of your attitude towards Order/Chaos and Good/Evil. It is as fluid as the characters personality and decisions/actions.
For an extraplanar entity, these concepts are a way of life and cannot be changed nearly as freely. Literally, if you live in the outer planes.

Note: When I refer to 'good points', I mean that if you continually perform acts that are directly contrary to your alignment it will shift accordingly. The bigger the act, the more you slide along the alignment chart. This is done by the DM and usually happens only after the reasoning behind the act is given.

That's... very, very similar to what I posted above. The second paragraph here is literally the same idea as I had. So... great minds think alike?

[Kane0]

Yep, I was happy to see that one of the great homebrewers of GitP had the same line of thought as me :smallsmile:

I don't have any specific rules for it though, It's more of a case of "Okay Graham, thats some chaotic points if you do that alright?"

Maybe some kind of incentive to stay dedicated to one alignment and not fly all over the place to avoid smite evils and protection against X spells?

Edit: Will this be a part of G&G?

[Grod_The_Giant]

Yep, I was happy to see that one of the great homebrewers of GitP had the same line of thought as me :smallsmile:
:smallredface:


Maybe some kind of incentive to stay dedicated to one alignment and not fly all over the place to avoid smite evils and protection against X spells?
Mmm, yeah. In Exalted, you can apparently spend a Willpower to add your Virtue score to a roll made when acting in accordance to that Virtue... maybe something similar? Spend a bit of XP, gain a bonus?


Edit: Will this be a part of G&G?
No idea. I came up with it for that, but we kind of shelved the alignment question until further notice. I put it back up mostly to show a friend of mine for a campaign he's running.

[Yitzi]

According to this, you can have a score of 11 in Good, 10 in Evil, and be considered Good, even though you're a lot more balanced someone with 4 in Good and 0 in Evil.
In addition, you can only match one alignment this way, so being very Lawful will mean you won't detect as Evil. I wouldn't advise that.
Also, by your rules you need 10 distinct significant actions to go from "marginally good" to "marginally evil" if you fully neutralize, which is probably too much. (And if you don't neutralize, then you can go from "marginally good" to "marginally evil" in two actions, which is too little.)
Also, it makes it too hard for someone with hundreds of evil actions under his belt to undergo a true change of heart and become good.
And giving subtypes is a bit extreme for many games.