Problems with removing alignment system

[zeek0]

Hello all,

I plan on removing the alignment system from any games I might DM for philosophical reasons and replacing it with an alternate system for defining character. What effect will this have on the mechanics of my game?

[Zweisteine]

None, if done right.

You'll just have to warn your players against using spells like holy word and detect evil.

Some other stuff might happen, but not much.

Make paladins smite enemies in general, and you're pretty good (at least in core).

[ddude987]

There won't be to many problems. You'll have to account for spells like detect evil, and alignment requirements for feats, classes, et cetra.

[137beth]

a)Remove alignment requirements.
b)Remove the alignment domains and spell descriptors.
c)If you want, you can replace holy word and variants with something else, or just remove it. Other alignment spells can either be trivially de-alignment-ized (e.g., for protection from evil, the main benefit is the protection from compulsion, which doesn't depend on alignment), or removed (notably, Detect Evil).

For creatures that have DR/Alignment, replace it with DR/Cold Iron or DR/Silver, as appropriate for the creature's alignment (chaotic creatures are weak to cold iron, lawful outsiders are weak to silver).

Smite Evil becomes Smite Enemy. Optionally, give paladins Detect Magic to replace Detect Evil.

That's it, really.

[oxybe]

i would say "detect hostile intent" over detect magic, basically it lets the pally know if there is someone in the nearby area who is intending to hurt the pally or his allies... an early warning system, if you will.

at higher levels it can even detect outsiders like bateezu or tan'ri or vile undead like mummies, liches, vampires, ghouls, etc...

basically it does what detect evil does but in a kinda roundabout way.

i agree on the smite evil/enemy. if you really don't want it just be a faceless damage rider, maybe add a minor requirement for use of smite be that the paladin must openly declare the target enemy of the church beforehand or something (as a free action or as part of the smite), announcing to the enemy and those around him that the pally won't stand for this guy existing.

[zeek0]

Wow, thanks for all of the replies. I appreciate it. I mostly just wanted to make sure that there weren't esoteric rules that would bite me in the ass. Anybody have anything else, no matter how small?

[Darrin]

Some of the classes need minor tweaking (mostly the Paladin). Some classes can just ignore the lack of alignment (bards, monks, druids, etc.).

The biggest change will be you'll want to rework the alignment-based domains offered by deities. You can either ignore them, or replace the alignment-based spells with similar thematic stuff: Chaos gets freedom/random stuff, Law gets command/dominate stuff, Good gets positive energy/healing/angelic stuff, Evil gets necromancy stuff, and so forth.

I have an old article fragment I was working on years ago that tackled some of the domain stuff. I'll see if I can dig it out.

Aligned weapons I was going to swap with similar +2 abilities. Profane = vampiric, Sacred = merciful + something else, Axiomatic = Paralyzing/Domineering, Anarchic = Morphing/Confusing.

DR and aligned attacks... I think I was going to refluff with special materials. As in, DR/lawful became DR/adamantine, DR/evil became DR/mithral, or something like that. Hadn't quite worked that out yet.

The alignment-based spells I was just going to remove, ignore, or rework on the fly if they came up. Stuff like holy word would just work on any enemy, or just replace it with some other debuffish/blasty spell. Reworking all the spells was probably the biggest chunk of work to do, but my PCs weren't doing that much casting, so mostly I just ignored them.

[Joe the Rat]

See about tweaking your cosmology a bit. If you're going without traditional alignment at all, then you can recompose your planes as you see fit, and ideally one that matches what fits your ideas.

Divine powers are keyed to something - typically concepts, values, or spheres of influence. Define each by what they support, and what they refute. Ta-da, "good" and "evil" redefined by the doctrine of faith, rather than pinned absolutes.

[veti]

It's easy. An hour of houseruling should see you home free. Rename a few spells, redefine a few others, anything you can't see how to fix - just cross it out.


See about tweaking your cosmology a bit.

If you want the extra work, this could be fun. The traditional 'map' of the Outer Planes is closely tied to the alignment chart - take the opportunity to redraw it. You could pare it down to just two or three planes (or just one, known as "The Afterlife"), or expand it to 30 if you've got the time - your call.

[QuackParker]

I don't believe it can be removed without majorly overhauling certain spells and abilities that make use of it. Classes that can target or detect certain alignments will feel less useful. Clerics and other divine casters will really feel the burn unless you retool their abilities to work another way. You might say a cleric spell that targets evil applies to any generally not nice character, but that might overly expand a cleric's power. Just my couple copper on the subject.

[Kraken]

I get rid of alignments for players and most creatures, but I don't get rid of alignment subtypes, such as what's possessed by demons. So detect alignment spells, holy word et al, and so forth are only going to work against things like angels, devils, archons, and inevitables.

[Maginomicon]

Or... you could just make it about intentions instead of about acts (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=283341), then you don't have to remove anything.

[Undraukar]

@Maginomicon: I love your guide. I haven't adopted the whole system yet as a DM, but I've used it to give the proper morals to several pcs. Thanks a lot!

[Mcdt2]

Personally, I'm a fan of changing alignment to match the colors from Magic the Gathering. (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?t=174163) It allows you to keep the concept of "alignment as an elemental force" thing, if you like that. It also models ideologic alignments very well, too. I also like it because being defined by (up to) 3 colors adds more depth to the alignment than the 2 axis Moral-Ethical alignment of D&D RAW, as well as having a bit more moral ambiguity in some aspects, with people of any color alignment able to be "good" or "evil", a distinction which is (under this system) entirely subjective on the part of the obvserver.

[Honest Tiefling]

The only time alignment has been helpful is to help (but not completely) guide players into making a group with similar goals. I assume your system will do this just fine.

The only problems I could think of are outsiders like celestials and fiends, who tend to show up a lot, get summoned a lot, etc.

[RedMage125]

While I like alignment (and get into a lot of alignemnt threads over on the WotC boards), I understand that some people don't. I've had discussion with other alignment detractors, and I had never realized how much work can go into removing alignment and it's mechanics from 3.5e. In order to understand, I actually went though the PHB and DMG, and found that there's actually quite a bit of homework involved, and that's not counting "non-core" material.

Obviously, alignments themselves for characters, as well as alignmentrestrictions on classes have to go. It's up to you to then decide what becomes of the Paladin class and the "Code of Conduct" line in their class entry.
Holy/Unholy/Anarchic/Axiomatic weapons are best removed wholesale.
Alignment named Domains removed Wholesale.
Spells get complicated. For every spell that has some kind of alignment mechanic, it needs to be examined. Do you keep it in, and make it apply more generally, or do you remove it entirely?

Summoning spells should just lose the alignment tag and otherwise not be affected.
Undead-creating spells, too. Just lose the tag.
Detect X alignment spells are best removed AS SPELLS. Paladins should get somethign to balance this out. Many alternatives have been suggested over the years, such as the "hostile intent" thing, but making that call, and devising such a replacement is also part of the homework.
Protection from X/Magic Circle Against X spells should be left in, with alignment-specific factors simply ignored. Allow it to give the defensive bonuses across the board, regardless of alignment of attacker (this includes mental control and physical contact from summoned creatures).
Holy Smite and it's other alignment friends are technically invalidated by the removal of alignment domains, but should also be explicitly removed as spells.
Dispel Evil/Good/etc. is best left included, but made generic to affect multiple kinds of enemies. The offensive part only affects a single outsider or spell effect, and the rest is defensive, so keep it in and make it general.
Holy Word and the other alignment versions should also be excised from the game, as both the offensive and exclusionary effects of the spell are 100% based on alignment. "Fixing" this spell to allow it to apply more widely would be nearly impossible to implement fairly. Unless you don't mind your clerics aving access to a debilitating, but IFF spell with no drawbacks or considerations, then by all means leave it in.
Holy/Unholy/etc. Aura spells are best left in, and the bonuses granted across the board just like Dispel Evil, etc.

As for spells from other sources that have Evil tags, the best thing to do is examine why the Evil descriptor is in the spell. Is it because casting the spell itself is just described as particularly heinous? Like Avasculate from the Spell Compendium? For those spells, remove the alignment tag and keep them in, by removing alignment, you make those spells carry no more moral weight then Fireball. If the spell actually affects creatures differently based on their alignment, that's when you have to examine it closely. If applying offensive/defensive benefits of the spell to all allies/enemies across the board seem to powerful, just remove the spell. If not, just keep it in and have the effects apply to everyone.

[veti]

Holy Smite and it's other alignment friends are technically invalidated by the removal of alignment domains, but should also be explicitly removed as spells.

For everything using the word 'holy', I would base it on religion rather than alignment, with the effect dictated by the relationship between your church and the subject's.

For instance, if you're playing a medieval European setting, then 'Holy Word' by a Catholic cleric - who may be of any "alignment" in the old-fashioned sense - would have no effect on fellow Catholics, but would affect anyone not in the Catholic communion (including heretics, pagans, Muslims, and anyone who's been excommunicated). If you have a polytheistic pantheon, then probably a Holy Word by a cleric of Thor won't affect followers of Odin or Frey or Tyr, but would affect worshippers of Loki or Hel. (Up to you to decide about Zeus or Apollo.)

[Telok]

I sucessfully did this for my game.

Alignment became a supernatural aura granted by a divine being. The four alignments were Light, Dark, Order, and Chaos. The only way to have an alignment was to serve or be created by a god. All divine casters (and divine PrCs) had to worship a god and gained that god's alignment aura, all aligned outsiders were created by gods and had their creator's alignment aura. No creature can have more than one alignment aura.

Because of this I did not need to change spells, magic items, or DR. Everything kept it's listed subtype and effect. It's simple and it worked.