Results 31 to 60 of 87
-
2020-06-22, 06:33 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
The problem with these give yourself alignment things is a third of the chart never gets used. Who is going to call themselves evil? Who would say "Yeah if I was murdered in an action movie it would be seen as a victory."?
And then this happens. I hope they do.
For me personally, Lawful Good. Definitely lawful and I try for good at least. I have done freeform but for any system that actually has rules I would like those rules to take as much of the load off of me as it can. Which means I don't want rules that I have to overrule (or ask for an overruling) very often. This has a bunch of other effects as well but none that effect alignment.
Or you could say my role-playing alignment is medium-narrative (from heavy-tactical to light-narrative).
-
2020-06-22, 08:21 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2019
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Chaotic good, a revolutionary!
Get your physics out of my D&D!
Proudly Chaotic
Optimism is delusion pessimism will save the world
-
2020-06-22, 08:26 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Nov 2004
- Location
- Australia
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
When DMing I'm Neutral Good with Chaotic tendencies. My whole aim is to tell a fun story for the players and for them to have fun. I'm very much a freeform DM, with barely any prep work. I make up the plot on the fly, reacting to what the players are doing. As for rules, there has to be some, but a lot of the time I see them more as guidelines, and are happy to modify or make up new ones to facilitate the story. As long as the players are having fun, that is the main aim.
As a player, I'm still Neutral Good, but with more lawful tendencies (even if most characters I play are CG). Once again the aim is to have fun with the other players, which means I tend to play oddball characters who could break the system but don't. If I'm playing a spell caster, for example, I will intentionally dial back their inherent broken OPness so that it doesn't overshadow other characters and even act as more a support role (For example, one of my favourite characters was a half-orc barbarian/druid who was dumb as a brick, didn't take wild spell and spent most of his time in animal form.) I don't rules lawyer and follow the rules as laid out by the DM - I will point out rules of course, but won't argue with their judgement on them.
-
2020-06-25, 02:47 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2009
-
2020-06-25, 03:12 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
I assume you mean, "other than me".
How many people roleplay for the fun of themselves, rather than the fun of the group? Most of them.
Most people have no concept of what's fun for the group, outside whatever Pavlovian training they've gotten from past experiences. Let's face it: there's a reason "read the GM's mind" is spoken derisively, and the GM is just *one* of the players at the table - you can't expect most players to successfully read *everyone's* mind, now can you?
I mean, I metagame like a dolphin, *and* I explicitly bring up concerns I have, and I *still* don't see everything. And there's *very* few of the many players I've played with who could possibly live in the union of the sets "successfully read what I would consider fun" and "OP not evil".
So, either Playgrounders are highly atypical for the gaming community (which, fair to say, they are), or they are not fully self-aware in this regard.
-
2020-06-25, 09:31 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
“Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”
-
2020-06-26, 12:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2016
- Location
- Akron, Ohio
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Chaotic Good while DMing, Lawful Neutral-Evil while playing.
I do whatever seems most interesting for the group while DMing, and usually that involves inventing things wholesale (though occasionally I do look up a rule for something I don't remember and use it because it's silly).
I do not argue rules with the DM while playing (unless they're very wrong about something while trying to follow the book), and play characters that I'll enjoy. Whether that puts me at Neutral or Evil depends on whether the players like my character (they usually do as long as the DM doesn't give them a perfect set up and reason to murder their characters). So probably lawful neutral on this side, then.
-
2020-06-26, 06:55 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
To Quertus: I do believe the group that would call themselves evil is a lot smaller than the group that actually is evil. Probably isn't a direct subset either. I don't want to go too deep with it but even if you are evil you then have to realize that and admit it out loud or be good/neutral with a poor opinion of yourself.
To Keltest: Yeah here I think we are talking more about intent than results? Good/evil is pretty hard to measure even in the limited context of applying rules at the table.
-
2020-06-26, 08:33 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Aug 2005
- Location
- Virtual Austin
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Anyone making their own house rules would be Lawful.
After all, rather than just do what you want - you are actually creating rules.
-
2020-06-27, 02:10 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jan 2009
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Rules are there for a reason.
Play rules as written, but when a rule comes in the way of ease of play/fun, make a ruling for now and look over the rule later.
If I feel the rule needs changing, look over it until i understand why it's there and it's purpose and if i feel it still needs changing, then change the rule with the knowledge on how it'll change the game.
same with adding rules that weren't there in the first place.
-
2020-06-27, 08:35 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
True neutral. With good/lawful leanings.
1. I definitely wanna have fun myself. I'm not just there to indulge the whims of the players. Although often if the group is having fun, I'm having fun as well. Therefore neutral with good leanings.
2. I like sticking to some rules. Not necessarily the book rules, mind you. But I do enjoy a complex ruleset, for the complex interactions it can provide, and of course the consistency it can bring. And I am not above changing rules I don't like (or at least rules whose effects on the game I don't like). I have some game design aspirations in that sense. Or delusions (you can check my signature and decide for yourself). But at the same time... There's this idea of "rule of cool" floating in the community (mostly seen it parroted over on reddit, now that I think about it). Maybe it has some more nuanced meaning, but I've usually seen it in the context of creating slapstick moments. Which is something I positively hate in a game (in comedy too). Therefore neutral with lawful leanings.Last edited by martixy; 2020-06-27 at 08:37 AM.
My attempt at non-awful fumble rules
Arcane Archer minimal fix (maybe not so minimal anymore)
Reworking the Complete Adventurer Tempest PrC
Expanding the Pathfinder Called Shots system
Keyboard shortcuts for d20srd.org
Guide to Optimizing To-Hit
Obscure Psionic Power Index
🕷
-
2020-06-27, 09:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
{scrubbed}
No, no, no...
You're thinking of percussive maintenance with a two-by-four. That's when you whack them over the head with a... well, a two-by-four.
Percussive maintenance with a clue-by-four is when you whack them over the head with so many clues and hooks, they can't possibly miss the plot. At least four in each instance of course.Last edited by Peelee; 2020-06-27 at 10:47 AM.
My attempt at non-awful fumble rules
Arcane Archer minimal fix (maybe not so minimal anymore)
Reworking the Complete Adventurer Tempest PrC
Expanding the Pathfinder Called Shots system
Keyboard shortcuts for d20srd.org
Guide to Optimizing To-Hit
Obscure Psionic Power Index
🕷
-
2020-06-27, 09:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Sep 2018
- Location
- TARDIS repair, Gallifrey
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
See that cool Teifling? Thanks, potatopeelerkin! If you want something like it, they have more avatars up for adoption in the thread with the same name...
Hey, I have an extended signature now!
-
2020-06-27, 10:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Feb 2006
- Location
- NYC
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Agree. Mutual entertainment is a goal I also value.
You could always make rules and then ignore your own rules.
That probably wouldn't be strictly Lawful, even though you did make rules.
Because the thread is about player behavior, not in-game behavior. That's the topic:
{scrubbed}Last edited by Peelee; 2020-06-27 at 10:52 AM.
I want you to PEACH me as hard as you can.
-
2020-06-27, 10:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2009
- Location
- Washington D.C.
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
The Mod on the Silver Mountain: Re-opened.
Last edited by Peelee; 2020-06-27 at 10:52 AM.
Cuthalion's art is the prettiest art of all the art. Like my avatar.
Number of times Roland St. Jude has sworn revenge upon me: 2
-
2020-06-27, 11:11 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
{Scrubbed}
Let me be more direct.
Linking malice directed towards other people, with the tenuous connection of using the game as a vehicle goes outside of the scope of this thread and the original question. Even when discussing "evil"(in the context of this particular thread).
Let me put it like this:
"Evil" that can get your table to fall apart is what we want to talk about.
"Evil" that can actually land you in IRL jail is out of scope here.Last edited by Pirate ninja; 2020-06-27 at 07:49 PM.
My attempt at non-awful fumble rules
Arcane Archer minimal fix (maybe not so minimal anymore)
Reworking the Complete Adventurer Tempest PrC
Expanding the Pathfinder Called Shots system
Keyboard shortcuts for d20srd.org
Guide to Optimizing To-Hit
Obscure Psionic Power Index
🕷
-
2020-06-29, 06:56 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
"Good", in this context, is the same as good, in the contest of food, where you make lots of horrific food that nobody eats, because you thought it was what people wanted. (I say this having done exactly that - and having seen exactly that be done - many times).
"Evil", in this context, is, in the context of food, making what you know is good, because you like it. If not everybody shares your tastes, that's their problem - they can bring their own food.
IME, this thread's definition of "good" is much more likely to (be implemented poorly and) "get your table to fall apart".
That is, under Evil, it is simultaneously a) much more *obvious* what each person wants, facilitating any conversations about gaming desires with examples, should people desire to corroborate on fun, and b) it's guaranteed that at least one person (yourself) will be facilitating your fun. Good fails both of those metrics.
-
2020-06-29, 07:09 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
To Quertus: Going back to the original post, look for the word "expense":
That sounds like actually evil to me. On a practical level the difference between neutral and evil often comes down to how many people you are willing to get hurt along the way. And here it is explicitly at the expense of others. Now there is a neutral variant which is more "have fun, don't hurt anybody and hope they have fun" but here we are missing the "don't hurt anybody" bit.
Any really there are probably 1000s of ways to implement the idea of "make sure everyone has fun" any yes there are probably 100s (if not a smaller 1000s) of ways that don't work. If you are trying to help and you are not being helpful do something else, being a good person takes work.
-
2020-06-29, 11:52 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Jul 2014
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Tasty metaphor. I agree, generally, but such incompatibilities do tend to cause a lot of both overt and hidden problems on the table in the long run.
TBH I'm not (and can't be) sure what everyone considers "good" in this thread, but it does strike me as a bit too loose and gung-ho. Hence why I agree with you on the value of "evil".
But I wanna give a definition of "good": A person who is there to make the rules serve the most players(this includes the DM), and is even willing to compromise on his own fun if that means the rest have a better time for it. I for one, would not be willing, so that puts me on neutral. Neither would I go with "my way or the high way", but being a bit selfish is perfectly understandable after a string of bad experiences, and most of us have been there.
My attempt at non-awful fumble rules
Arcane Archer minimal fix (maybe not so minimal anymore)
Reworking the Complete Adventurer Tempest PrC
Expanding the Pathfinder Called Shots system
Keyboard shortcuts for d20srd.org
Guide to Optimizing To-Hit
Obscure Psionic Power Index
🕷
-
2020-06-29, 11:58 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Dec 2013
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
So, based on the OP, i believe the good/evil axis was intended to map to how you have fun, while the law/chaos axis maps how closely you hold to the books.
Good wants everybody to have fun, and wont knowingly have fun at the expense of other players. Neutral only cares about their own fun, but is not willing to antagonize anybody, while evil really doesnt care how anybody else feels as long as theyre enjoying themselves.“Evil is evil. Lesser, greater, middling, it's all the same. Proportions are negotiated, boundaries blurred. I'm not a pious hermit, I haven't done only good in my life. But if I'm to choose between one evil and another, then I prefer not to choose at all.”
-
2020-07-01, 08:36 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
I'm glad you worded it that way - it took me 3 tries to find Waldo
Maybe good "tries" to help others, but "stupid good" is often explicitly at the expense of (the fun of) others (and one's self).
So… good is evil?
IME, most gaming groups are terrible at communication. They act with hubris and unfounded assumptions, and make things that are terrible without thinking about it.
Evil, at least, is actually trying to do good - is actually trying to make something of verifiable value.
*And* evil is much more likely to result in productive communication, to move towards collaborative gaming: I'm trying to defend *my* fun, but, to do that, I need (or would benefit from) your help.
Good doesn't have such fail-safes, such inherent modes of improvement built in.
That… is complicated. Such differences… need not be incompatibilities; they can instead result in a full-course meal. Whether that's better than just eating appetizers or just eating desert is a matter of opinion; I, personally, can appreciate both.
I'm not sure that your explanation matches "how you have fun".
And, still playing evil's advocate, note how personal growth / improvement is inherent in Evil (getting kicked out isn't conducive to having fun), whereas good has no such incentives built in (and I've seen lots of idiotic good, in games and other areas of life, making things worse in the name of misperception, that keep harming things in part because they not only lack such incentives to improve, but because "belief that they've done good" actively incentives them to keep their blinders on).Last edited by Quertus; 2020-07-01 at 08:48 AM.
-
2020-07-01, 07:00 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2019
- Location
- Somewhere over th rainbow
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Depends on who I am dming for.
Mostly Chaotic good because my players like playing fast and loose with the rules, and often try to do things not nescessarily covered by the rules.
Probably without extremely chaotic players I'm neutral good.
-
2020-07-02, 08:33 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2010
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Neutral Good. I'm fine with rules until they get in the way.
Plague Doctor by Crimmy
Ext. Sig (Handbooks/Creations)
-
2020-07-03, 06:09 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
By definition no. I mean there are several arguments about how things aren't clear cut you can make:
- Good/evil intentions can have evil/good results. Even ignoring delusion and such things.
- Whether something is good or evil can depend on context. Rain that triggers a flood as opposed to rain that ends a drought.
- It can also depend on degree. It is all right to want things but if you are being greedy that is bad.
*And* evil is much more likely to result in productive communication, to move towards collaborative gaming: I'm trying to defend *my* fun, but, to do that, I need (or would benefit from) your help.
-
2020-07-03, 09:43 PM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
This might say more about me than about the concept, but…
Give an example of how good, busy doing what they think others would want, would actually have a *productive* conversation. Good is more "(help me) do this thing (that my hubris says is best)", which is no better than what they were already doing.
-
2020-07-04, 06:30 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2018
- Location
- Dr88;FR;NL;EU;Earth;Sol
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
-
2020-07-04, 07:32 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Yeah, no, in practice, good doesn't do that. It *could*, but, in the many, *many* groups I've gamed with, good has *never* successfully had that conversation. *Thought* they've had that conversation? Maybe. But *never* actually had that conversation.
Or I might just be too senile to remember it
But, off hand, I can't remember *ever* seeing such a conversation. But I do remember *many* conversations where good learned to make poison for the group because they had a dumb version of an attempt at that conversation and, in their hubris, believed (incorrectly) that they'd had that conversation, and understood what others wanted.
And many more groups where good never even tried, and just believed that they knew best, because "of course everyone loves kale".
EDIT: and, no, that's absolutely *not* "OP Lawful", which is simply "do you follow the rules".
(IME, "OP Evil" - "this is what *I* care about, and I will create and defend it" is a working, teamwork-enabled strategy. "I do this for the good of others"? Not so much. YMMV.)Last edited by Quertus; 2020-07-04 at 08:42 AM.
-
2020-07-04, 08:05 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Mar 2015
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
"Is there anything anyone emphatically does not want in the campaign?"
"Do we have a healer yet? Do we need one?"
"What do people want on the meat pizza?" "Aren't you a vegetarian?" "We are ordering two pizzas."
Good is more "(help me) do this thing (that my hubris says is best)", which is no better than what they were already doing.
-
2020-07-04, 08:20 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Apr 2018
- Location
- Dr88;FR;NL;EU;Earth;Sol
- Gender
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Cluedrew has the right of it. Groups that haven't successfully had that conversation aren't Good yet, despite intentions.
Bear in mind, this comes from someone who only considers deviations from Neutral worthy of an alignment description if they are actually character flaws.
-
2020-07-04, 09:50 AM (ISO 8601)
- Join Date
- Oct 2011
Re: What alignment are you when it comes to RPG rules?
Then, by your definition, I've never gamed with a good group.
That's beforehand, not during.
Same.
Same?
OK, *maybe* I've seen people smart enough to be (your definition of) functional good with regards to food.
Thing is, "good" doesn't lend itself to *improvement* *mid-game*. And your statements - as alien as they are to my gaming experience (and as incomplete as they are towards actually making a game fun) - don't counter my assertion.
… OK, fine. I have tried to run periodic SaMoLo sessions in some of my games. There technically *are* ways for good to be proactive and learn and improve mid-game.
But, as you say, it's hard. It's not inherent in goodness to improve the quality of the game. Unlike evil.