PDA

View Full Version : Alternative Takes On Alignment



LudicSavant
2015-02-03, 05:13 AM
This is something I wrote up for a campaign I participated in, and a lot of people liked it, so I thought it might be worthwhile to post here. This was written with 3.5e in mind but can be applied elsewhere.

Note that this is essentially a houserule. In fact, I generally consider all takes on alignment to be houserules, since the canon explanations of alignment are so inconsistent and contradictory that they basically mean nothing and any given person's interpretation is their own rather than something clearly established by the sourcebooks (which is why I don't have much respect for threads arguing "what alignment is X?"). Please don't try to argue that this does not reflect the way the RAW treats alignment. That would be missing the point.

__________________________________________________ _______


Different campaigns treat alignments vastly differently and "Chaotic Evil" in some worlds means "random stupid lol murder." Really, there's an equally silly interpretation available for pretty much every alignment, such as "the true neutral character that has to do something evil if he sees something good happen" or the much maligned "lawful good character without any real understanding of serious moral philosophy, with a stick rammed all the way up." I've already encountered several questions on the nature of alignment in this game, so I've decided to work out a thorough answer to get everyone on the same page.

http://37.media.tumblr.com/tumblr_lzyn4vRsBg1qbbwwto1_400.jpg

What is Alignment?
First thing out of the way: Alignment is not an overly simplistic way of summarizing all moral dilemmas so that you know who to smite just by throwing down a detect spell. It gives you some information about a person, but it isn't a substitute for actually getting to know that character and the role they play in the world. This is a world with complex, three-dimensional characters and plots. This means that just as in real life, good people can serve the cause of evil, evil people can serve the cause of good, and that sometimes it can be very hard to discern who is really right or wrong. Good people can go to war with each other over differing ideals, or associate with Evil people whose goals align with their own.

Much like in Eberron, if you gather up a dozen commoners, you can expect that roughly 1/3rd will ping as Evil, 1/3rd will ping as Neutral, and 1/3rd will ping as Good. This does not mean that it will be okay for you to smite 1/3rd of the commoners wherever you go. A person having questionable intentions isn't necessarily bad for society, and indeed may not have committed any crimes. A person might even dream of doing horrible things, might enjoy doing horrible things, but wouldn't actually act on those impulses for fear of the consequences, and indeed may be a valuable and productive member of society.

Okay, so what's it mean to be of a given alignment?
In the world, there is positive, negative, axiomatic, and anarchic energy. They are fundamental elements of the magical physics of the multiverse, and are endemic to pretty much everything in nature, just like the other prime elements (fire, earth, water, air). A human, as well as pretty much everything else living, has positive, negative, axiomatic, and anarchic energy as part of their biology. Think a little bit like the concept of "humours" or "pneuma." Like humours, pneuma, ki, hormones, or pretty much whatever analogue you want to draw, these forces influence and are influenced by a person's personality, mood, et cetera, although the way in which the influence occurs can be murky and poorly understood.

These energy types have many properties, which are taken advantage of by arcane technology (technology meaning "functional cultural knowledge" not, you know, "oh hey steampunk, because the word technology clearly implies robots, electronics, or clockwork"), represented by the mechanics of the game.

When you use a Detect Alignment spell, you are not in fact connecting on the phone to some supposedly morally perfect superbeing who can tell you whether he thinks this guy or girl is a good person or not. It's a bit more like a polygraph test... it measures physical aspects of the character themselves (the aligned energy within them), which correlate to a certain range of behavioral patterns. This is why even mindless things can show up on your Evil-dar: Mindless undead are always "Evil" not because they're actually capable of evil thoughts, but because they're animated by profane energy, which you can detect. Likewise, clerics radiate the alignment of their deity (not their own alignment) strongly because the fact that they constantly channel aligned energy creates such a strong signal that it overrides anything you'd normally be able to read.

Good / sacred energy is generally associated with positivity, mania, piety, ability to get along with a crowd and empathize, confidence, self-righteousness, and so forth. Evil / profane energy is generally associated with negativity, depression, disillusionment or cynicism, stress, anger, hatred, envy, or a desire to change the world order / rebelliousness. Either way, an astute thinker would note that both sides of the coin have their virtues, even if the Good/Evil side has the elements that are stereotypically recognized as good/evil, and that things like rage or uncompromising selfish ambition are still valuable qualities in many circumstances (heck, without anger and hate, who would mind injustice? And just look at examples in fiction of characters like Captain Kennit (from the Liveship Traders trilogy) and all the good he did for the world despite not caring one whit for anyone but himself at the expense of others).

So we've got Good and Evil covered. What about Law and Chaos?
Let's face it, these alignments are an incoherent mess in D&D, and the contradictions are... omnipresent. To quote a relevant observation from the Tome of Fiends:



We are aware that especially if you've been playing this game for a long time, you personally probably have an understanding of what you think Law and Chaos are supposed to mean. You possibly even believe that the rest of your group thinks that Law and Chaos mean the same thing you do. But you're probably wrong. The nature of Law and Chaos is the source of more arguments among D&D players (veteran and novice alike) than any other facet of the game. More than attacks of opportunities, more than weapon sizing, more even than spell effect inheritance. And the reason is because the "definition" of Law and Chaos in the Player's Handbook is written so confusingly that the terms are not even mutually exclusive. Look it up, this is a written document, so it's perfectly acceptable for you to stop reading at this time, flip open the Player's Handbook, and start reading the alignment descriptions. The Tome of Fiends will still be here when you get back.

There you go! Now that we're all on the same page (page XX), the reason why you've gotten into so many arguments with people as to whether their character was Lawful or Chaotic is because absolutely every action that any character ever takes could logically be argued to be both. A character who is honorable, adaptable, trustworthy, flexible, reliable, and loves freedom is a basically stand-up fellow, and meets the check marks for being "ultimate Law" and "ultimate Chaos". There aren't any contradictory adjectives there. While Law and Chaos are supposed to be opposed forces, there's nothing antithetical about the descriptions in the book.
So what the heck is Law and Chaos? I don't think people want "Chaotic" to mean "stupid/insane," and "Obeys the law of the land" doesn't even begin to make sense as a universal force alignment under even casual scrutiny, so how do we handle this?

http://s30.postimg.org/qf2aoyoap/41529182.jpg

Law and Chaos reflects the conflict between the needs of the many and the rights of the few. Iconically lawful dwarf society has deep respect for tradition and the needs of the clan over the needs of the individual. Iconically chaotic elf society is much more interested roaming free and forging their own, indepedent destinies.

Chaos / anarchic energy is generally associated with things like free spirited-ness, living in the moment and seeking fresh solutions, and a general flouting of a core premise of authority (e.g. rejecting the notion that someone is "higher" than you and thus their opinions inherently matter more based on things like rank, station, or birth. It does not suggest that you can't think that someone is worth listening to and organizing with, but it's because of their ideas rather than who they are. Basically, a rejection of submission). Demons are paragons of Chaos because they are fiercely individualistic, and no demon would ever submit to another on the basis of something as flimsy as a title.

Law / axiomatic energy is generally associated with things like regimented camaraderie, being conservative and looking to tradition for answers, and respecting a core concept of authority (e.g. the notion that someone is your superior and their opinions have more impact than those of lower station, rank, or birth. Basically, a willingness to be submissive. Submission shouldn't necessarily be seen as a simply negative trait: There are tons of philosophies built entirely around the idea of submission as a core high virtue, including most major modern religions). Your opinion on the local laws of the land do not determine whether you are Lawful or Chaotic, and indeed certain laws are indicative of a Chaotic culture rather than a Lawful one. Formians are extreme paragons of Law because they they submit utterly to a regimented hierarchy, have little sense of individual rights and a complete willingness to sacrifice themselves for the needs of the hive. Indeed, with their hive mind, there is very little separation between the will of the individual and the will of hive at all.

This version seems to hit the required bullet points: It is difficult to point to either philosophy and say one is good and the other is evil, thus being an independent axis. Both types of philosophies also commonly come into conflict, which justifies them being an axis with opposing sides. And neither side is required to carry the idiot ball.

Note that being Lawful doesn't necessarily mean that you don't care about the rights of individuals and being Chaotic doesn't necessarily mean that you don't care about the good of the many. However, it would generally be expected that when these two desires conflict, you'd opt for one over the other.

Examples in Logasior
Logasior has major rulers or characters who exemplify just about every alignment. One example of the complex nature of alignments is Tyretlethen. He is Lawful Evil, but he is also very proud and concerned about the well-being of the Sapphire Empire. He recovered the country from economic collapse and greatly improved the quality of living for all of his subjects. Of course he did all of this while plotting to turn Bastion into a barren wasteland. Nevertheless, you probably won't have too much trouble finding paladins willing to support this guy's cause for the sake of the Sapphire Empire.

So what about my character? Can I be Evil?
Characters of all alignments, from Lawful Good to Chaotic Evil, are acceptable as PCs. What matters more than the alignment tag is your character's specific personality, motivations, and so forth. Some character archetypes just aren't good for the group (see "Chaotic Stupid" and the like), but if you come up with an Evil character that would make sense to work with a Good party, for instance, that's totally okay (think everything from Magneto and Professor Xavier to Vegeta and Goku. There is an overwhelming abundance of examples in fiction). What matters is that the player dynamic works, not just the two words following "Alignment."

http://s28.postimg.org/wg9v6juhn/comic6132_Eberron.png

Special Rules Notes
If you're undead or deathless, you count as the alignment of the aligned energy that animates you for the sake of spells and effects, regardless of your personality (indeed, it applies even to mindless undead, which are incapable of making moral decisions). Likewise, if you are a cleric, you count as the alignment of your deity for the sake of spells and effects regardless of your actual personality. For instance, worshipping Pelor and channelling positive energy makes your polygraph test come up Good, even if your personality is Neutral. This represents a flaw in the test, not your personality. If these auras conflict, use whatever one would ping stronger on a Detect spell (for instance, "Cleric of an (alignment) deity" has a stronger aura than "Undead" or "Aligned Outsider").

However, your personality always determines the alignment you count as for the sake of alignment requirements for classes and similar features. So, for example, you can be a Paladin (classic LG style) and be turned into a vampire, and you won't automatically fall or be prevented from taking additional class levels, even though you will have trouble with Hallowed areas. On the other hand, your new nature may influence you to take actions that would cause you to fall, if you don't have the strength of will to resist your new urges.

This is essentially the Eberron alignment variant rule, which you can read more about here: http://keith-baker.com/dragonmarks-411-religion-and-faith/ and here: http://keith-baker.com/dragonmarks-44-good-and-evil/

__________________________________________________ _______

Bonus: Here's another take on alignment I wrote up that simply removes it entirely, yet retains functionality for alignment-based mechanics.


Removing alignment entirely is a possibility. Or, perhaps a less-intrusive goal would be to remove alignment from all things that don't have "special alignment auras." In that case, one might ask "what do we do about those mechanics which depend on it?"

The important effects are... lessee... Protection from X, Detect X, and the Word line. If there are any important ones I'm forgetting, lemme know.

- Alignment restrictions for acquiring features, generally speaking, can go the way of the dodo without impacting much of anything. Paladins no longer have alignment requirements but do have codes of conduct. I recommend defining new codes of conduct rather than using the existing ones, since queries like "Evil acts" return "undefined."

- Protection from X spell could perhaps become reflavored as a sort of "Planar / Possession Ward" spell. It prevents summoned extraplanar creatures from entering an area, it provides an AC bonus against anything not native to the caster's plane or summoned, undead, clerics, paladins, and it suppresses outside attempts to control you (compulsions and such). The most important part of PfX is the suppression of compulsions, so it's important to keep that part intact, and that seems to fit with the "possession ward" flavor.

- Detect X becomes "detect clerics/paladins/blackguards/outsiders/undead/deathless" or more simply "detect aligned auras / aligned energy channeling." Clerics ping as the alignment of their deities, regardless of their own personalities. Paladins / Blackguards / etc all ping as the alignment of their aura. Deathless always ping Good, other undead always ping Evil, Outsiders ping of their respective alignments. Anyone who doesn't have a deity (or has a neutral aligned deity) who can turn undead pings Good, and vice versa for Rebuke Undead.

- Holy Word / Blasphemy / Dictum / Word of Chaos simply affect all beings not from your plane that don't share your deity's aligned aura. If a balor does it on the material plane, he's hitting everyone except for, say, clerics of Erythnul. This means that monsters like Balors tend to keep their CRs intact but clerics take a tad of a nerf in most campaigns, and I'm okay with that.

- Radiant Charge / Doom Charge / Tide of Chaos / Law Bearer can simply work on any sentient enemies whom you have a specific moral disagreement with (e.g. you must know something, even if it is a minor or generalized detail, about the target. You can't use it on random peasants). Radiant charge may work on undead/evil outsiders, Doom charge may work on Deathless/good outsiders. To qualify to have these maneuvers, your deity's alignment must be within one step of the maneuver's alignment requirement.

- Smite works on everything. No I don't care that this is a buff, Paladins are a low tier class. Alternatively, use the solution for the aligned charge maneuvers above.

- Aura of Chaos / Perfect Order / Tyranny / Triumph stances make you ping as if you were a cleric of a god of those alignments. Aura of Triumph simply procs against all targets.

hamishspence
2015-02-03, 06:48 AM
This is something I wrote up for a campaign I participated in, and a lot of people liked it, so I thought it might be worthwhile to post here.


Personally I think you've summed up "the way people try to handle alignment in Eberron-ish games" fairly well.

LudicSavant
2015-02-03, 07:12 AM
Another thing I don't think I mentioned explicitly in that original post is that I feel it's important to note that Good, Evil, Chaos, and Law are names inevitably given to an observable phenomenon by a culture (even if that culture is "divine"), and that culture might be wrong or otherwise have an agenda.

That, at least, can apply to pretty much every setting, and indeed I can't think of a single example of a published D&D campaign setting where it really seems like Good means the same thing as good and Evil means the same thing as evil. You can totally pull this out of your hat as a plot point for a Forgotten Realms game, for instance.

Actually, speaking of Eberron, I seem to recall one theory regarding the Sovereign Host being that the Dark Six were the gods of the hill peoples (representing things like primal natural forces or tribal concerns) whereas the Sovereign Host were the gods of the "civilized" city peoples (representing things like "civilized" economics, organized armies, industry, etc). Since the city won, the alignment that pinged for the worshipers of the enemy gods was named "Evil." This also fits with the Sovereign Host's penchant for syncretism throughout the setting.

Xerlith
2015-02-03, 09:10 AM
It's a good sum up, but I see two problems with it:
1st: Positive/negative energy is unaligned. So the undead/deathless can't ping on the Detect X spells - they're grey.

2nd: More of a question: Who'd be in this ruleset be a character snarky, cynical and pessimistic, who's got sadistic urges BUT is able to hold them at bay most/all of the time? On the Good/Evil axis, I mean.

LudicSavant
2015-02-03, 09:19 AM
1st: Positive/negative energy is unaligned. So the undead/deathless can't ping on the Detect X spells - they're grey.

According to the rules for Detect Evil, undead do indeed ping strongly on Detect Evil. Much more strongly than actual Evil creatures, in fact. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectEvil.htm. They apparently ping this way even if they aren't Evil undead (such as ghosts, which are core undead which are not Evil http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/ghost.htm).

So, Detect Evil is detecting *something* in undead that affects their aura reading, which has nothing to do with their personality since tons of undead don't even have personalities.

Likewise, Detect Evil makes a Neutral cleric of, say, Lolth ping as having a very strong Evil aura.

Anyways, it would be a simple matter of replacing "negative/positive" energy with "aligned" or "Sacred/Profane" energy if you don't like making that connection.


2nd: More of a question: Who'd be in this ruleset be a character snarky, cynical and pessimistic, who's got sadistic urges BUT is able to hold them at bay most/all of the time? On the Good/Evil axis, I mean.

Probably Evil or Neutral. Doesn't mean he's a bad guy, it just means that that's the way the spell reads it.

Xerlith
2015-02-03, 10:41 AM
According to the rules for Detect Evil, undead do indeed ping strongly on Detect Evil. Much more strongly than actual Evil creatures, in fact. http://www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/detectEvil.htm. They apparently ping this way even if they aren't Evil undead (such as ghosts, which are core undead which are not Evil http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/ghost.htm).

So, Detect Evil is detecting *something* in undead that affects their aura reading, which has nothing to do with their personality since tons of undead don't even have personalities.

Likewise, Detect Evil makes a Neutral cleric of, say, Lolth ping as having a very strong Evil aura.

Anyways, it would be a simple matter of replacing "negative/positive" energy with "aligned" or "Sacred/Profane" energy if you don't like making that connection.


This is what I wanted to address - it seems like a design mistake (most probably) which is not fixed in your take - so either the planes/energies should gain alignment descriptors or the undead become gray in Detect Evil. There is no real middle ground as I see it.

Seto
2015-02-03, 12:46 PM
How's the comic called ? It looks nice.

I like your interpretation, it resembles the way I handle alignment, although there are a few differences (about positive/negative energy, law/chaos definition, and the presence or the lack of a neutral-aligned energy).

hamishspence
2015-02-03, 12:50 PM
How's the comic called ? It looks nice.

I like your interpretation, it resembles the way I handle alignment, although there are a few differences (about positive/negative energy, law/chaos definition, and the presence or the lack of a neutral-aligned energy).

That's the 4E Dungeons & Dragons Comicbook - it's fairly hilarious:

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/ComicBook/DungeonsAndDragons

LudicSavant
2015-02-03, 01:09 PM
The first two images are from the 4e D&D comic series, the third is from one of the 3.5e Eberron sourcebooks.

hamishspence
2015-02-03, 01:15 PM
The first two images are from the 4e D&D comic series, the third is from one of the 3.5e Eberron sourcebooks.

Third one doesn't seem to be working for me.

Beta Centauri
2015-02-03, 01:25 PM
Thanks for using images from the comics. I only realized recently that they were written by John Rogers, and I very much enjoy them. I'm sad that there won't be more.

I'm open to any interpretation of alignment that doesn't crack the whip on players. I don't use alignment at all, but if I did my take would be that it's like eye- hair- or skin-color: permanent and has no influence on behavior though lots of people think it does. It's also like blood-type in that it's can cause physical reactions to certain things.

So, a person reads as evil, and can be affected by anti-evil (or pro-evil) stuff, but has never done an evil thing in their life. Meanwhile, another person reads as good, etc., but is despicable.

Many beings, of course, will act in accordance with their alignment just because they think they should, or because others think they should. But it doesn't influence behavior and can't be influenced by it.

Ravens_cry
2015-02-03, 01:33 PM
I had an idea I wanted to use for a civil war campaign to throw out Good/Evil and Law/Chaos completely and instead focus on alignment as allegiances.
Good and evil are still things, but they are in-universe things as opposed to game things.
That creepy alchemist who's probably killed children for his 'lovely dolls'? Well, yes, she's not someone you want around, but she's on your side, while that noble knight who does his best to uphold the letter and spirit of true chivalry? Nice chap, but he's on Their side.
Like I said, it would be for a civil war campaign.

Beta Centauri
2015-02-03, 01:40 PM
I had an idea I wanted to use for a civil war campaign to throw out Good/Evil and Law/Chaos completely and instead focus on alignment as allegiances.
Good and evil are still things, but they are in-universe things as opposed to game things.
That creepy alchemist who's probably killed children for his 'lovely dolls'? Well, yes, she's not someone you want around, but she's on your side, while that noble knight who does his best to uphold the letter and spirit of true chivalry? Nice chap, but he's on Their side.
Like I said, it would be for a civil war campaign. Yeah, I like that.

In the D&D Basic set I had, there was Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic. It seemed pretty clear that Lawful was really code for "good" and Chaotic was really code for "evil," since the author made it sound like anyone who was Chaotic would be disruptive and uncooperative and all "evil" monsters were Chaotic.

But the interesting thing is that when it came to the spell Protection from Evil, "evil" was defined as "any alignment other than yours," making "evil" entirely relative, at least for the purposes of that spell. I'm sorry that never became an overarching rule.

Ettina
2015-02-05, 07:21 PM
So, basically, Lawful = Collectivist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Collectivism), and Chaotic = Individualist (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Individualism). Interesting idea.