How does a helm of opposite alignment effect neutral alignment?

[eyebreaker7]

If a character with a neutral alignment side (LN, NG, NE or CN) gets affected by the alignment change, how does it change the neutral part? Also what about a true neutral alignment?
The DMG says "...radically altered to an alignment as different as possible from the former alignment - good to evil, chaotic to lawful, neutral to some extreme commitment (LE, LG, CE or CG)."
How should/would you decide the neutral side change? I guess if it was LN or CN you could keep the N part? But what about true neutral, how would you figure that out? DM call? What factors would you consider for that "call"? Maybe a dice roll?

[Beni-Kujaku]

If a character with a neutral alignment side (LN, NG, NE or CN) gets affected by the alignment change, how does it change the neutral part? Also what about a true neutral alignment?
The DMG says "...radically altered to an alignment as different as possible from the former alignment - good to evil, chaotic to lawful, neutral to some extreme commitment (LE, LG, CE or CG)."
How should/would you decide the neutral side change? I guess if it was LN or CN you could keep the N part? But what about true neutral, how would you figure that out? DM call? What factors would you consider for that "call"? Maybe a dice roll?

Obviously DM's call. Did the true neutral character have a tendency to abandon orphans he found on the road because it would cost too much to help them? Go to LG. Did they always protect their friends and try to find more peaceful alternatives instead of beating enemies into submission? Inverting that should go to CE. There is no really neutral alignment, just a not-so-clear-cut distinction on this particular character.

[Darg]

True neutral roles a d4. Other neutrals are the opposite of the determined side and you flip a coin for the other as they are 'equidistant' from eachother. So a NG could be either LE or CE.

[Thurbane]

My understanding is:

LG > CE
LN > CN
LE > CG
NG > NE
NN > Roll 1d4: 1. LG, 2. LE, 3. CG, 4. CE
NE > NG
CG > LE
CN > LN
CE > LG

...although that may be because we run it as it was in 1E/2E.

[eyebreaker7]

That seems like a pretty fair option.

[Particle_Man]

I mostly agree with Thurbane, although with a five player party I would give four identical character sheets (except for alignments being CG, LG, LE and CE) of the formerly NN character to the other four players and have them duke it out in a mental arena battle royale, last one standing being the one that sets the alignment for the formerly NN character.

[Remuko]

I always see/run it as there 2 TN alignments. Inclusive and Exclusive TN. If you reversed a TN's alignment it would switch from one, to the other.

Inclusive is all about the balance of all aligned acts/actions/beings etc. All existing in balance. Exclusive is all about nearly tyrannical neutrality, such that Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos are all see as sinful or to be avoided.

Basically as TN you either encompass all alignments in equal amounts, or none of them.

For partial neutral alignments I'd say you just flip the non-neutral half. CN becomes LN etc.

[Ettina]

I always see/run it as there 2 TN alignments. Inclusive and Exclusive TN. If you reversed a TN's alignment it would switch from one, to the other.

Inclusive is all about the balance of all aligned acts/actions/beings etc. All existing in balance. Exclusive is all about nearly tyrannical neutrality, such that Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos are all see as sinful or to be avoided.

What about the people who just kinda think laws are good in moderation but freedom is also important, and don't actively want to hurt others but don't really want to go out of their way to help anyone?

[eyebreaker7]

What about the people who just kinda think laws are good in moderation but freedom is also important, and don't actively want to hurt others but don't really want to go out of their way to help anyone?

That my friend is a different cursed item call a "Blender of opposite alignment" lol


ooooo what about a helm that makes you check your alignment every day? It cant be removed obviously or it wouldn't matter. Well technically you COULD chop of the head wearing it I suppose and then bring them back to life. Unless I was the DM and made it so head wearing the helm was the part that the resurrection grew from.

[Darg]

On a failed save, the alignment of the wearer is radically altered to an alignment as different as possible from the former alignment

I guess I just take it too far for the crowd.

[Particle_Man]

I always see/run it as there 2 TN alignments. Inclusive and Exclusive TN. If you reversed a TN's alignment it would switch from one, to the other.

Inclusive is all about the balance of all aligned acts/actions/beings etc. All existing in balance. Exclusive is all about nearly tyrannical neutrality, such that Good, Evil, Law, and Chaos are all see as sinful or to be avoided.

Basically as TN you either encompass all alignments in equal amounts, or none of them.

For partial neutral alignments I'd say you just flip the non-neutral half. CN becomes LN etc.

Although could one then be Chaotic and "Inclusive" Neutral (between good and evil) and switch to Lawful and "exclusive" Neutral (excluding good and evil as both sinful)?

[Remuko]

What about the people who just kinda think laws are good in moderation but freedom is also important, and don't actively want to hurt others but don't really want to go out of their way to help anyone?

That just sounds like Inclusive TN, just weakly.


Although could one then be Chaotic and "Inclusive" Neutral (between good and evil) and switch to Lawful and "exclusive" Neutral (excluding good and evil as both sinful)?

My idea is only for N/N on both axes, but I suppose someone who is N on one can hold such views.

I just came up with the split TN "theory" because of how broad True Neutrality can be. Where you have TNs that think all other alignments are "sin" and then you have stuff like Io who encompasses all alignments and loves good and evil, chaos and law, equally. It was just necessary for my brain to comprehend the existence of the alignment.

[Thurbane]

So, do we mostly agree there's two types of True Neutral (or NN, if you prefer) characters:


Don't sway particularly towards good, evil, law or chaos and/or just apathetic to morals in general.
Highly motivated to maintain the balance between good, evil, law and chaos.

Is there more than just these two varieties that I'm missing or forgetting about?

Also, back to an earlier point: if the true function of the helm is to make alignment as opposite as possible, how is LE or CE any more opposed to NG than NE is? Adding a law/chaos axis to the changed alignment feels likes it dilutes the intent of being truly opposite, to me anyway.

[Beni-Kujaku]

So, do we mostly agree there's two types of True Neutral (or NN, if you prefer) characters:


Don't sway particularly towards good, evil, law or chaos and/or just apathetic to morals in general.
Highly motivated to maintain the balance between good, evil, law and chaos.

Is there more than just these two varieties that I'm missing or forgetting about?

Also, back to an earlier point: if the true function of the helm is to make alignment as opposite as possible, how is LE or CE any more opposed to NG than NE is? Adding a law/chaos axis to the changed alignment feels likes it dilutes the intent of being truly opposite, to me anyway.

Well, if you're going there, you could just put a third axis of alignment, the "tolerance". Low tolerance means you want to make everyone around you act and/or think the same way as you do (in terms of alignment, at least), while high tolerance means that you think what you think but accept that other people around you can have other opinions. And of course, there would be a neutral point between the two. So the Helm would change a LET into a CGI, but where would the Helm go on a NNN character?

About NE being opposed to CG or LG, I don't think it is, and I don't think the text on the Helm does either. It only mentions "neutral to some extreme", not "a neutral component". As far as I understand it, the Helm would change NE into NG and LN into CN.

[Darg]

Also, back to an earlier point: if the true function of the helm is to make alignment as opposite as possible, how is LE or CE any more opposed to NG than NE is? Adding a law/chaos axis to the changed alignment feels likes it dilutes the intent of being truly opposite, to me anyway.

Opposite doesn't only just mean the other of two diametrically opposed positions. It can also mean the further side. Take a triangular pyramid with equidistant corners for example. Pick a corner and then choose an opposite point. You'd have 3 choices correct? The idea is the same here. LE and CE are further from NG than NE. By the same token, they are "as different as possible" as wanted by the helm.

[Particle_Man]

But it is not a pyramid in D&D. It is a great wheel (basically a circle). So NG is diametrically opposed to NE because it is across the diameter of that great circle.

[Darg]

But it is not a pyramid in D&D. It is a great wheel (basically a circle). So NG is diametrically opposed to NE because it is across the diameter of that great circle.

I just said that opposite doesn't have to mean singular diametric opposition. The shape doesn't matter. The helm wants you to be "as different as possible," which doesn't necessarily mean your inverse alignment. The helm doesn't say "true neutral." The description states, "good to evil, chaotic to lawful, neutral to some extreme commitment (LE, LG, CE, or CG)." You could say that it is implying that it's only referring to true neutral, but that ignores what the item description actually says. Neutral alignments are shifted to an extreme.

[KillianHawkeye]

The middle alignment is just called "Neutral" in 3rd Edition and Pathfinder, though. "True Neutral" is a vestige of older editions.

[Thurbane]

I just said that opposite doesn't have to mean singular diametric opposition. The shape doesn't matter. The helm wants you to be "as different as possible," which doesn't necessarily mean your inverse alignment. The helm doesn't say "true neutral." The description states, "good to evil, chaotic to lawful, neutral to some extreme commitment (LE, LG, CE, or CG)." You could say that it is implying that it's only referring to true neutral, but that ignores what the item description actually says. Neutral alignments are shifted to an extreme.

That's a pretty common reading, but I'm not convinced it is RAW, and almost certainly not RAI if you look at earlier edition versions of the Helm.

[Chronos]

What is written in the rules is exactly what RAW is. The rules say that neutral goes to an extreme. So if we have, say, a neutral good adventurer, the good part becomes evil, and the neutral part becomes extreme.

[Particle_Man]

But as noted neutral is one of the nine alignments here, not merely the neutral component of five of them.

And in 3.5 and earlier editions the great wheel is a thing. Alignment is not just a point of view but part of the (meta)physical nature of the multiverse. So NE and NG are as (meta)physically opposite as they can be, as are LN and CN.

It is part of why powerful slaadi and inevitables cannot beat the dr of angels and powerful demons, respectively.

[Thurbane]

What is written in the rules is exactly what RAW is. The rules say that neutral goes to an extreme. So if we have, say, a neutral good adventurer, the good part becomes evil, and the neutral part becomes extreme.

That is one reading of raw, yes.


Helm of Opposite Alignment

This metal hat looks like a typical helmet. When placed upon the head, however, its curse immediately takes effect (Will DC 15 negates). On a failed save, the alignment of the wearer is radically altered to an alignment as different as possible from the former alignment—good to evil, chaotic to lawful, neutral to some extreme commitment (LE, LG, CE, or CG). Alteration in alignment is mental as well as moral, and the individual changed by the magic thoroughly enjoys his new outlook. A character who succeeds on his save can continue to wear the helmet without suffering the effect of the curse, but if he takes it off and later puts it on again, another save is required. The curse only works once; that is, a character whose alignment has been changed cannot change it again by donning the helmet a second time.

Only a wish or a miracle can restore former alignment, and the affected individual does not make any attempt to return to the former alignment. (In fact, he views the prospect with horror and avoids it in any way possible.) If a character of a class with an alignment requirement is affected, an atonement spell is needed as well if the curse is to be obliterated. When a helm of opposite alignment has functioned once, it loses its magical properties.

Strong transmutation; CL 12th; Craft Wondrous Item, creator must be 12th level; Price 4,000 gp;Weight 3 lb.

Another equally valid reading is that "neutral to some extreme commitment (LE, LG, CE, or CG)" is only referring to N characters, not character with only one neutral alignment component (NG, NE, CN, LN).

I don't think this is something we'll reach an agreement on, it's been debated ever since the release of 3.0.

Feel free to tell me I'm wrong, and provide citations, but I'll never be convinced it can't be read either way.

[Bayar]

What I would do at my table is not force alignments on people becausee the system is bull**** and sneaking a helm of opposite alignment on someone would be as much fun as rolling your alignment in FATAL.

As to what the OP says, I'd say characters that only have one side neutral have their non-neutral part swapped. True neutral characters would remain unaffected. Why? Lets say that lawful is 1 and chaotic is -1, good is a and evil is -a, with neutral being the middleground of both ie 0. The opposite of 0 is still 0 thus it either doesn't have any effect or has such minor effect as to not be noticeable.

[Particle_Man]

As to what the OP says, I'd say characters that only have one side neutral have their non-neutral part swapped. True neutral characters would remain unaffected. Why? Lets say that lawful is 1 and chaotic is -1, good is a and evil is -a, with neutral being the middleground of both ie 0. The opposite of 0 is still 0 thus it either doesn't have any effect or has such minor effect as to not be noticeable.

That was the Wonderella solution. The super-hero webcomic had heros and villains, and of course there was an opposite universe that reversed good and evil. Except Wonderella wasn't really a hero that tried that hard (took "me" days off, etc.) and so her opposite was pretty much like her, since "the opposite of neutral is still neutral!"

https://nonadventures.com/ (sorry I didn't want to dig for the exact day of opposite universe, but here is the webcomic in general).

[Ettina]

So, do we mostly agree there's two types of True Neutral (or NN, if you prefer) characters:


Don't sway particularly towards good, evil, law or chaos and/or just apathetic to morals in general.
Highly motivated to maintain the balance between good, evil, law and chaos.

Is there more than just these two varieties that I'm missing or forgetting about?

Also, back to an earlier point: if the true function of the helm is to make alignment as opposite as possible, how is LE or CE any more opposed to NG than NE is? Adding a law/chaos axis to the changed alignment feels likes it dilutes the intent of being truly opposite, to me anyway.

What about someone with Blue & Orange morality (ie, strongly held moral standard on some axis totally irrelevant to standard alignment)? For example, a druid who only cares about how everything affects the local ecosystem?

[Remuko]

That was the Wonderella solution. The super-hero webcomic had heros and villains, and of course there was an opposite universe that reversed good and evil. Except Wonderella wasn't really a hero that tried that hard (took "me" days off, etc.) and so her opposite was pretty much like her, since "the opposite of neutral is still neutral!"

https://nonadventures.com/ (sorry I didn't want to dig for the exact day of opposite universe, but here is the webcomic in general).

so in case it wasnt clear, basically what i'd been saying is I treat neutrality as its own third axis. so yeah neutrality can be inverted and can have varying degrees across it like any other axis.

[Particle_Man]

What about someone with Blue & Orange morality (ie, strongly held moral standard on some axis totally irrelevant to standard alignment)? For example, a druid who only cares about how everything affects the local ecosystem?

This might depend on how much alignment is used as part of the basic metaphysical building blocks of the multiverse. When (as in the default setting) there are outer planes literally composed of “good”, “law”, “chaos” and “evil” then the magic of the helmet is messing with those specific metaphysical forces. The closest I can think of is a helmet that changes a cleric’s domain from fire to water, or changes an undead to a deathless. So if the third axis of various types of true neutrality or blue-orange ness had some metaphysical planar backing it would be more integrated into the campaign and make a helmet that switched that axis also more integrated into the campaign. But that is just me.

So it seems in the default great wheel settings to mean a bigger metaphysical realignment than just changing what someone cares about.

[flat_footed]

https://art.pixilart.com/eef267cfd7b5a5b.gif

[Thurbane]

Just stumbled on something somewhat related to the debate on exactly how HoOA is intended to work, in regards to neutral alignment components.

The UA/SRD section on Incantations (underlining mine):


Betrayal: The incantation seemingly succeeds, but the subject of the incantation (or, in rare cases, the caster) undergoes a dramatic alignment change. Over the next 1d6 minutes, the subject’s alignment becomes the extreme opposite of what it was previously (for instance, lawful good becomes chaotic evil, or chaotic neutral becomes lawful neutral; a neutral subject randomly becomes lawful good, lawful evil, chaotic good, or chaotic evil). The subject generally tries to keep its new outlook a secret.