Has anyone used a successful alignment system other than D&Ds original?

[randomhero00]

For instance, if you have, what do you do with all the [evil] and [good] spells and things needed to overcome regen?

Cause I'd really like to change it, but I'm not seeing an easy way except for a complete overhaul.

[hamishspence]

If you're in a big hurry, replacing DR/alignment with DR/magic might be a good stopgap.

regen can be overcome by whatever seems most appropriate- maybe the metal the beings tend to be sensitive to (silver for devils, cold iron for demons).

Going right back to OD&D, "Detect Evil" merely detected beings hostile to you- so could be done as "Detect Enemy".

Then Protection from Evil can be Protection from Enemy, the Word spells can be "Word of Doom" (which only works on enemies) and you're mostly set.

[nedz]

You could replace alignments with political motivations, everyone is essentially neutral: aiming to advance their own interests or perhaps some ideology. But it wouldn't be the same game. Nothing to stop you making a world where most NPCs behave like this though.

Alternatively you could make them all work for a mad computer, but that would be a different game entirely

[randomhero00]

If you're in a big hurry, replacing DR/alignment with DR/magic might be a good stopgap.

regen can be overcome by whatever seems most appropriate- maybe the metal the beings tend to be sensitive to (silver for devils, cold iron for demons).

Going right back to OD&D, "Detect Evil" merely detected beings hostile to you- so could be done as "Detect Enemy".

Then Protection from Evil can be Protection from Enemy, the Word spells can be "Word of Doom" (which only works on enemies) and you're mostly set.

Hmmm, I kind of like this. More simple than I thought. I'll bring this up with my DM.

[hamishspence]

This covers the main mechanical parts of alignment (and has the handy fact that you won't be accidentally clobbering the atypically aligned member of your party with friendly fire.)

So a cleric of (Insert Good Deity Here) and a Blackguard of (Insert Evil Deity Here) can fight side by side, hurling spells, against the Big Bad, without any problems.

The other reason for alignment, is for factions, personalities, and so on.

In which case, you could keep some of the terms as a very rough guideline, but make sure they have no mechanical effect.
You could look outside of D&D for various ways of describing personality, motivations, what the characters will and won't do, etc.

You could play a "servant of the Powers of Chaos" who acts extremely Lawfully- and it wouldn't a a problem, because their "lawful" behaviour has no effect on their powers.

Drop the various alignment restrictions on spells, feats, etc if you feel they don't make sense, and you can do a lot of interesting things.

"evil" characters with Vows of Chastity, Purity, Peace, etc, or "good" characters with Willing Deformity and the like, for example.

[randomhero00]

This covers the main mechanical parts of alignment (and has the handy fact that you won't be accidentally clobbering the atypically aligned member of your party with friendly fire.)

So a cleric of (Insert Good Deity Here) and a Blackguard of (Insert Evil Deity Here) can fight side by side, hurling spells, against the Big Bad, without any problems.

The other reason for alignment, is for factions, personalities, and so on.

In which case, you could keep some of the terms as a very rough guideline, but make sure they have no mechanical effect.
You could look outside of D&D for various ways of describing personality, motivations, what the characters will and won't do, etc.

You could play a "servant of the Powers of Chaos" who acts extremely Lawfully- and it wouldn't a a problem, because their "lawful" behaviour has no effect on their powers.

Drop the various alignment restrictions on spells, feats, etc if you feel they don't make sense, and you can do a lot of interesting things.

"evil" characters with Vows of Chastity, Purity, Peace, etc, or "good" characters with Willing Deformity and the like, for example.

I totally agree. i think it makes for a much more realistic and fun game when alignment becomes philosophical rather than mechanical.

Another thought is to have some evil and good, but only the most powerful of beings are actually true evil or good. Like elder evils, gods, and such, since they're sort of "perfect" beings. But otherwise, it wouldn't affect party play, you'd just play your character how you felt it so at the time. I think it'd be a lot more realistic.

So has anyone actually done this? How'd it turn out?

[hamishspence]

Another thought is to have some evil and good, but only the most powerful of beings are actually true evil or good. Like elder evils, gods, and such, since they're sort of "perfect" beings.

This could be good for a change of pace- if you can only overcome its regen or DR with a holy weapon, and holy weapons are very rare.

[Flickerdart]

>other successful alignment system
Implying that the standard system is in any way successful?

[Warclam]

I really like this. The alignment system always felt a little off to me mechanics-wise; this seems like a more straightforward, streamlined system.

It has some odd consequences for the Paladin, I note. "Smite evil" becomes just smite, and their detect evil ability becomes the very handy detect enemy. Incarnum starts looking odd too.

[The Big Dice]

There are reasons why D&D, Stormbringer and Warhammer are the only games to really bother with Alignment.

Stormbringer has the idea of allegiance to a particular Alignment, but there are only really two: Law and Chaos. It's possible to drift from serving one to serving the other, but the forces of both are particularly jealous and vengeful against what they see as betrayal.

Warhammer has the idea of Chaos ingrained deep into the world. I couldn't say about the later editions, but 1st ed Warhammer FRP had the exact same Alignments as D&D 4th edition.

And in D&D, it started as a more philosophical generalisation, then became a concrete mechanic when WotC took over. There's no real need for me to go on about that, it's been discussed in plenty of detail recently.

[Zonugal]

The alternate systems from Unearthed Arcana can be a nice transition. I tend to prefer the honor-based system.

[CubeB]

Let's see...

d20 Modern uses an Allegiance System. You can have Allegiances toward Law, Chaos, Good, and Evil if you want, but most allegiances are toward things like organizations or ideals. (A Soldier has an Allegiance toward his platoon. Mafiosos have the Omerta Allegiance. Etc.)

I, personally, prefer the Opposition system. Spells that specifically target alignments are changed to target the caster's Opposition instead.

So a Paladin of the Benyarian Theocracy can smite a Barbarian, as the Holy Empire of Benyar in this setting considers Barbarians to be evil.

However, these effects specifically tie into what the caster believes to be evil. A Wand of Protection from Evil purchased by a Warforged Cleric of the Becoming God probably won't be as effective against followers of the Lord of Blades if the Cleric doesn't consider the Lord of Blades to be all that evil.