PDA

View Full Version : Alignment Loopholes? Assume group is onboard with idea



goto124
2015-05-02, 11:01 AM
For the purposes of this thread, we shall assume that the entire group, players and DM alike, are all close friends know what they're getting into, understand one another well, and have no issues with what they're about to do.

So. I've been thinking of funny ideas, including an evil (small e) person who somehow pings Good, and other instances of cosmic alignment abuse.

(I imagine that most DMs/players won't want such a huge disconnect between evil and Evil, etc, if the efforts to have alignment make sense is anything to go by. Which is why we started off by assuming everyone's excited to see alignment get snapped in half!)

The question is, how? After OOC agreement, we'll have to start with a rather imperfect cosmic alignment system. One that's full of highly abusable loopholes. Alignment systems are usually intended to go the opposite direction, so I'm not sure how to find the other kind.

If I had to homebrew one, how would I go about it? Would only actions matter, with intentions and actual consequences meaning nothing? Would it have Poison = Evil stuff?

And how, exactly, would players 'abuse' it?

Spriteless
2015-05-02, 11:32 AM
There is some inspiration to be taken from video games where there is a lightside/darkside ditchonomy.

Good can be measured as a matter of faith. What if you've put your faith in someone stupid? I'm thinking of this scenario in KOtOR specifically. (http://blip.tv/sf-debris-opinionated-reviews/knights-of-the-old-republic-6-manaan-7073331)

In some games saving people is good, while saving people and then being a crazy jerk is evil. Ignoring people's danger is just not playing the game.

In some games you can game it by giving lots of presents. Perhaps presents that you know someone likes because you stole it from the same someone. Then you steal it again. Infinite loop of good will!

In Battlefield Hardline killing adversaries is evil. Handcuffing everyone and leaving them there indefinitely is good? Even in the game the cops were bad enough that the player is avoiding them, what about just leaving them to starve, or letting them get captured by an organization that worships [Evil deity of your choice]?

In the original game with a morality system, Ultima IV Avatar, you got the most generosity points giving a beggar 1 coin at a time. You could slaughter some monsters unrepentantly, but with others had to balance valor vs mercy... which just meant you should avoid fighting them. It was better to replay the same conversation about valor over and over rather than risk fighting a natural creature instead of a monster.

goto124
2015-05-02, 12:20 PM
The presents example is funny. Apparentally stealing isn't considered Evil (captial E)? Maybe it's purely Chaotic. Or you could be an evil and rich nobleperson in a city where poor peasants are made to pay high taxes. Since you're not the one directly doing the tax thing, it doesn't ping on cosmic alignment (and perhaps other reasons as well). The money you gave to the poor is going back to you anyway!

Just remembered Dishonored. You could avoid killing certain people, and instead leave them to fates worse then death. The game 'punishes' you for killing (more and stronger enemies to fight), but difficulty don't increase even if you sent someone to essentially eternal torture.

The Grue
2015-05-02, 01:49 PM
Just remembered Dishonored. You could avoid killing certain people, and instead leave them to fates worse then death. The game 'punishes' you for killing (more and stronger enemies to fight), but difficulty don't increase even if you sent someone to essentially eternal torture.

Dshonored wasn't a choice between Good and Evil though; it was between Easy and Hard. The game wasn't punishing you for killing, it was rewarding you for accomplishing a more difficult task.

Wartex1
2015-05-02, 01:52 PM
Plus, it wasn't some sort of cosmic system in Dishonored, as killing people helped spread the plague, and it made you more terrifying. This made people more scared of you.

Radar
2015-05-02, 02:50 PM
One of the prime examples from D&D-ish world is obviously Miko:
wanton murder? (check)
contempt for other people? (check)
literal adherence to LG allignment? (check)

A different archetype would be someone being Good for personal gain. Someone, who loves being adored or wants to build his social position on his popularity thorugh charity, chivalry and the like. I could even see a selfish and overall evil person to try to be Good, just because the afterlife perspectives look better then those for Evil people.

LokiRagnarok
2015-05-02, 04:39 PM
If I remember the trailer correctly, in WatchDogs you essentially have (technology-supported) precognition of evil deeds someone else is likely to do. If you go and beat them up before they start committing the crime? You have just beaten a usual citizen and a pillar of the community senseless for no obvious reason -> people fear you -> bad karma for you. Allowing the crime to start or to even run to completion, then punish the criminal? Everyone can see how good you are. Good karma for you!

goto124
2015-05-02, 07:43 PM
In Planescape, ping Evil =/= kill on sight because Evil is usually closer to 'steals bread to feed family' than 'murders kittens'. Or something. I'm not very clear on it.

Alignment would have to be highly mechanical for loophole abuse to happen, otherwise the loopholes would be nearly non-existant.

There also has to be reason to go through the trouble to abuse alignment in the first place. Even DnD 3.5e doesn't seem to depend that much on alignment, though its dependance is high compared to other DnD systems (and maybe people ignore a lot of the alignment requirements). Any recommanded alignment-dependant systems please? There seems to be a system where the kinds of spells you can cast depends heavily on your alignment, which would act as reason to abuse.

hiryuu
2015-05-02, 07:47 PM
One of the prime examples from D&D-ish world is obviously Miko:
wanton murder? (check)

If Roy was systematically lied to, ignored, forced to work with murderous outlaws, constantly had his decisions undercut, and had his family repeatedly threatened by outside forces, would you call his reactions "wanton murder," too?


contempt for other people? (check)

Check. Though, I'm sure you can have contempt for other people and still be good - look at Queen Aurala of Aundair. She holds pretty much every other ruler in contempt and wants to conquer the continent and rule it as supreme queen... but she's also not willing to let anyone get hurt to make that happen, least of all the common folk.


literal adherence to LG allignment? (check)

Big check. But, I expect a paladin working for a chaotic good organization to chafe.


A different archetype would be someone being Good for personal gain. Someone, who loves being adored or wants to build his social position on his popularity thorugh charity, chivalry and the like. I could even see a selfish and overall evil person to try to be Good, just because the afterlife perspectives look better then those for Evil people.

Yus. It's a great archetype. Queen Aurala fits this example again.

Another example from Eberron (which is a great place to find inspirations for good implementations of the alignment system) is King Kaius III - he's a vampire, he's imprisoned his grandson, mind-controlled that guy's sister, keeps a harem of blood slaves, and recruits anyone who dies into the military. Evil, ruthless, and power-mad, but it's because he wants peace and prosperity for his people.

It should be borne in mind that evil isn't selfishness - if that were true, ticks would be evil. It isn't about being number one - you can get that by personal training, perseverance, and luck (though success is most often just a matter of luck). Evil is intent to become number one by actively tormenting any of the other numbers.

goto124
2015-05-02, 08:08 PM
Wait. Small e evil, or Captial E Evil?

And we're looking for cosmic alignment that makes evil and Evil very different from each other. Not sure how the above applies.

Darth Ultron
2015-05-02, 08:52 PM
Well, you could take Igor. Igor likes to kill people. But we want Igor to ping good. Igor gets three choices:

1. He could kill at random. This would make him evil.

2. He could kill for himself. This would make him evil.

3. He could kill for someone else. This could make him good or evil or anything in-between.

Just look at number three:

Igor the court executioner could be lawful good. Igor the paladin could also be good. As could Igor the assassin. Igor the soldier, Igor the judge, Igor the cop and so on can all be good.

Lets take Igor the paladin who likes to kill. Paladin Igor does very much ''think with his sword''. If he encounters evil, he will simply strike to kill. If a person gives up, he will show mercy, but ''as long as they hold a weapon, then death is all they will get''. So the end result is a person that loves to kill people, all wrapped up in pure good.

The same way if Igor liked to steal, he could get a job as a repo agent or security tester, where he could legally steal things. He might also be a lawyer....

Look at Hydra from the Marvel cinematic/TV universe. They deliberately made the world worse while under the shield of doing good.

It is not so hard to spin evil into good...and there are plenty of loopholes.

theNater
2015-05-02, 11:48 PM
So. I've been thinking of funny ideas, including an evil (small e) person who somehow pings Good, and other instances of cosmic alignment abuse.
If it's just a desire to ping Good, you can do that straight with 3.5 as is. The alignment detection spells ping on outsiders from the planes of the appropriate alignment. So a celestial creature with an Evil alignment pings on Detect Good(for being celestial) and on Detect Evil(for being Evil).

The question is, how? After OOC agreement, we'll have to start with a rather imperfect cosmic alignment system. One that's full of highly abusable loopholes. Alignment systems are usually intended to go the opposite direction, so I'm not sure how to find the other kind.

If I had to homebrew one, how would I go about it? Would only actions matter, with intentions and actual consequences meaning nothing? Would it have Poison = Evil stuff?

And how, exactly, would players 'abuse' it?
In Fallout 3, alignment was on a point system, where murdering was something like -30 points and giving a thirsty person a glass of water was something like +5 points. So if you want to be Good, just make sure to provide water to 7 thirsty people for every person you murder. You could even get a water source in your home in the game(basically equivalent to a Create Water spell), so you could make your alignment as Good as you wanted, whenever you wanted.

Lets take Igor the paladin who likes to kill. Paladin Igor does very much ''think with his sword''. If he encounters evil, he will simply strike to kill. If a person gives up, he will show mercy, but ''as long as they hold a weapon, then death is all they will get''. So the end result is a person that loves to kill people, all wrapped up in pure good.
This doesn't work in 3.5 without some other effect going on. Remember, "Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others." If Igor wants to kill, and spends all his time killing, there's no personal sacrifice there.

Frozen_Feet
2015-05-03, 12:09 AM
The Alignment system doesn't need to be internally inconsistent to have "loopholes". It only needs to lead to results which are counterintuitive or contrary to real-life sensibilities of the players.

Consider pure Utilitarianism. You could have angels, or Gods, or even a non-sentient relic serve as an utility monster (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Utility_monster). From an in-universe viewpoint, sacrificing resources to the upkeep of this thing is Good, even at the cost of human lifes. Since most players place value on human lives... :smallamused:

Consider the Law-Balance-Chaos juxtaposition without the Good - Evil axis. You could have Paladins and Angels who ping as Lawful, giving Law the public appearance of Good... but also Executioners and Devils who ping as Lawful, as they serve and fulfill the darker aspects of cosmic order. Really, just the concept of cosmic order, even without fire and brimstone, seems to rub a lot of invidualistic folks the wrong way.

Even the d20 variation has this when you include the splatbooks. Due to wacky template mechanics, you can have someone ping as [Lawful] and [Good] despite actually being lawful neutral. See some Outsiders or neutral priests of good gods. I recall a funny discussion of how Maruts (Lawful Neutral) are really horribly tyrants and how them being amoral automatically means they're also unethical (which is false - they have a pretty clear work ethic, wouldn't be lawful if they didn't).

Hawkstar
2015-05-03, 05:38 AM
One of the prime examples from D&D-ish world is obviously Miko:
wanton murder? (check)
Miko never engaged in Wanton Murder.
Her kills have been:
1. An ogre that attacked her
2. Bandits that attacked and tried to kill her after she tried reasoning with them.
3. A band of brigands that were destroying the world, with an Evil leader and harboring a mass murderer. (At least from the extensive evidence she gained from them)
4. A murderous halfling that really does need to be killed for the safety of the world (Except now he's part of the team integral to saving it)
5. A traitorous king (She reached a wrong conclusion based on misrepresented evidence)

Radar
2015-05-03, 06:51 AM
Miko never engaged in Wanton Murder.
Her kills have been:
1. An ogre that attacked her
2. Bandits that attacked and tried to kill her after she tried reasoning with them.
3. A band of brigands that were destroying the world, with an Evil leader and harboring a mass murderer. (At least from the extensive evidence she gained from them)
4. A murderous halfling that really does need to be killed for the safety of the world (Except now he's part of the team integral to saving it)
5. A traitorous king (She reached a wrong conclusion based on misrepresented evidence)
Maybe this was a bit too much, but remember what was her first choice for dealing with OotS, how graphic her description was and how Shojo needed to very explicitly remind her to bring them alive? And considering number 5, it also shows how she was all too happy to go Judge Dredd on every occasion. Nevertheless, it's not the topic of the thread and there was way too many discussions on the subject already.


Nevertheless, it reminds me of Rorschach: I don't think anyone could call him good, but under for example D&D rules, he might make a solid Paladin and not fall for his actions. It wouldn't be a good paladin, but technicaly his action wouldn't break the typical code of conduct (assuming the goverment could be ruled as illegitimate).

Karl Aegis
2015-05-03, 03:48 PM
Most people would find training for many years for the sole purpose of breaking into people's homes, killing the occupants and taking their stuff highly unusual. You just need to take it one step further to become evil.

You're an adventurer. You are, by default, a deviant of society. Some societies will think you're evil if you overpower their society and take over. Others will laud you as a hero. In almost all cases, giving a starving orc orphan living in the hinterland where there is no food something to eat will be considered evil. But, some would consider that a Good act (other times helping an Evil person survive would be an Evil act).

veti
2015-05-03, 03:49 PM
Easy. All alignment spells are powered by the gods, therefore what you see when you ping someone is your god's (or gods') idea of what that should be.

Since every god has their own agenda and opinion of what constitutes "good", that should be enough to ensure plenty of subjectivity and unreliability.

The important thing is, you don't need to refluff or work around the Great Cosmic Balance Scales or whatever it's called - just abolish it from your universe. Job done. My group did it decades ago, it took us about a week to get over it and get on with having fun. We've honestly never even thought about going back on that decision.

Telok
2015-05-03, 05:02 PM
I recall in the first NWN game plaing a druid or a monk could be interesting. The game implemented the D&D alignment system in a fairly stereotypical manner of course, and the main quest offered you 'good' and 'evil' dialog responses. The main quest didn't change or alter for any of those responses, but your alignment did. If you didn't realize at the beginning of the game that this happened and you chose something like CN or LN as a charater alignment then playing a monk or druid meant that you had to either keep swinging good/evil on the main quest (and lost your class stuff if you guessed wrong on an answer) or you could go around and help/terrorize civilians to even out your alignment.

So I had, story wise, this druid who was helping to keep the entire country from being wrecked by evil stuff (which would then wreck nature) had to keep randomly killing and extorting innocent civilians to keep his 'druid union card'. Have you ever heard of a chaotic neutral druid who, in order to protect nature had to remain a druid, in order to remain a druid had to systematically kill a certain number of innocents (but not too many), in order to kill the correct number of innocents had to carefully track his good/evil deed ratio, and plan where and when to kill the innocents because killing the guards (who would defend the innocents) was also evil.

"Chaotic neutral". Hah! But that was his listed and enforced alignment.

Keltest
2015-05-03, 05:59 PM
I recall in the first NWN game plaing a druid or a monk could be interesting. The game implemented the D&D alignment system in a fairly stereotypical manner of course, and the main quest offered you 'good' and 'evil' dialog responses. The main quest didn't change or alter for any of those responses, but your alignment did. If you didn't realize at the beginning of the game that this happened and you chose something like CN or LN as a charater alignment then playing a monk or druid meant that you had to either keep swinging good/evil on the main quest (and lost your class stuff if you guessed wrong on an answer) or you could go around and help/terrorize civilians to even out your alignment.

So I had, story wise, this druid who was helping to keep the entire country from being wrecked by evil stuff (which would then wreck nature) had to keep randomly killing and extorting innocent civilians to keep his 'druid union card'. Have you ever heard of a chaotic neutral druid who, in order to protect nature had to remain a druid, in order to remain a druid had to systematically kill a certain number of innocents (but not too many), in order to kill the correct number of innocents had to carefully track his good/evil deed ratio, and plan where and when to kill the innocents because killing the guards (who would defend the innocents) was also evil.

"Chaotic neutral". Hah! But that was his listed and enforced alignment.

Thankfully they were better about that in 2. They had neutral responses for many scenarios, where such would be possible. Or sometimes responses for the other axis entirely.

Ettina
2015-05-08, 09:06 AM
I think all or most of the alignment detection spells are gotten by classes that explicitly follow a diety, right?

If so, look through that diety's portfolio. For the purpose of detect spells granted by them, things they like match their alignment, things they dislike are opposite to their alignment.

So, for example, if a cleric of Lolth uses Detect Good on someone, one of the things that would be considered a 'Good' trait is a hatred of spiders. For a borderline case, whether or not they like spiders could mean the difference between pinging 'Good' or not to that caster, but not to someone following a different Evil diety.

Or, conversely, for followers of Muradin, liking dwarves would be considered a 'Good' trait, and so a person at the evil end of neutral would ping Evil if they hate dwarves and non-Evil if they like dwarves.

In extreme cases, these little quirks would be evened out by other traits (eg an illithid who hates spiders would not ping as Good to a cleric of Lolth). But in borderline cases, it could make all the difference. A semi-Evil-ish racial supremacist dwarf, for example, might skate by not detecting evil to followers of dwarven dieties, while detecting evil to followers of other Good dieties.

King of Casuals
2015-05-08, 02:32 PM
In Pathfinder theres this armor material called angelskin. Literally the flayed skin of an angel. What it does is, if an evil character is wearing it (under their clothing if they're not stupid) the angel's residual good aura cancels out the first 10 levels of the character's evil aura, meaning that if you're level 10 or lower you register as neutral, and if you're any higher you only register as slightly evil instead of the puppy kicking, baby eating, angel murderer that you are.

Rainbownaga
2015-05-08, 03:25 PM
If I remember the trailer correctly, in WatchDogs you essentially have (technology-supported) precognition of evil deeds someone else is likely to do. If you go and beat them up before they start committing the crime? You have just beaten a usual citizen and a pillar of the community senseless for no obvious reason -> people fear you -> bad karma for you. Allowing the crime to start or to even run to completion, then punish the criminal? Everyone can see how good you are. Good karma for you!

Take the polar opposite of this to the extreme; paladin goes around murdering babies because they are going to grow up into murderous despots. Never falls, any other paladin that raises a weapon to him falls instantly.

Hawkstar
2015-05-09, 11:34 AM
Take the polar opposite of this to the extreme; paladin goes around murdering babies because they are going to grow up into murderous despots. Never falls, any other paladin that raises a weapon to him falls instantly.Have you heard of the Divinity games by Larian Studios? Because the two follow-up games (Beyond Divinity and Divinity II) are a result of a Paladin not killing the infant that would grow up to become the Lord of Lies and Damned One. Of course, it was just one baby.

He even tried raising him to be a good man, but... nope, lord of darkness it was to be.

DigoDragon
2015-05-09, 11:47 AM
I remember a player's ranger who's backpack registered as evil. Wasn't even't a sentient or magical backpack. Just simply registered as evil because he left a bad artifact in it for a week. :smalltongue: So he tried using that to get by some villains that could detect alignment. With a bit of a bluff check and the party cleric disguising his own alignment aura, he got by. Though the villains wondered why his alignment was "off-centered".

Another player was a paladin that carried a helmet of opposite alignment with him. Don't want to kill those evil orc babies? Helmet! Now he didn't have to. Cheesy heroics are cheesy, but entertaining.

Also, on the subject of loopholes:
Zoë: "Preacher, don't the Bible have some pretty specific things to say about killin'? "
Book: "Quite specific. It is, however, somewhat fuzzier on the subject of kneecaps."

Hawkstar
2015-05-11, 07:24 AM
Another player was a paladin that carried a helmet of opposite alignment with him. Don't want to kill those evil orc babies? Helmet! Now he didn't have to. Cheesy heroics are cheesy, but entertaining.All hail the mindraping hero!