Alignment Alternatives

[widderslainte]

Does anyone use alternative systems, or something completely different than, for alignment? I'm not intending this is a poll or pro/con debate, just trying to see what else people have found useful. I'm intrigued by the Priority system from Dragon #173, which seems to be reflected in d20 modern. Honor-based system seem pretty cool as well. Any ideas?

 

[TeeSeeJay]

Does anyone use alternative systems, or something completely different than, for alignment? I'm not intending this is a poll or pro/con debate, just trying to see what else people have found useful. I'm intrigued by the Priority system from Dragon #173, which seems to be reflected in d20 modern. Honor-based system seem pretty cool as well. Any ideas?

Not quite an "alternative" but something different I did in a game once was make alignment more important.

Instead of Gods, the campaign world had "forces" of law, chaos, balance, good, and evil, that were as potent and real as anthropomorphic deities.

Each "force" had a set of 3 values, such as good=truth,love,courage; evil=doubt,contempt,self. Balance took all the values and combined them, such as truth+doubt=skepticism, love+contempt=compromise.

good and evil didn't play as black and white concepts, because the core of the ethics system allowed that "evil" could be productive and necessary. Unchecked Love, for instance, would lead to Martyrdom, just as unchecked Contempt would lead to Hatred. The concept of Balance (neutrality in alignment terms) was very important to the world.

When the players were into it, it worked out very well. The character core ended up being more about ethics than morals, which I think is a concept close enough to the "alternative" system you're discussing.

The idea for this came from Ultima 7 part 2 (the computer game), and I lifted the law, chaos, and balance stuff straight from there. It was the game that put a different twist on the standard Ultima virtues.

I've got the whole system written up if anyone's interested.

 

[darkbard]

once again, not necessarily an alternative proposal but more of an expansion upon current alignment rules: monte cook's book of hallowed might has a rating system for each axis of alignment to help define what the axes components mean. it's well done in a qualitative, not quantitative way, i.e. a character with a higher "good" rating is not a "better" character but one with more severe philosophical convictions.

 

[WayneLigon]

... monte cook's book of hallowed might has a rating system for each axis of alignment ...

I'm thinking of taking a closer look at that. It might be pretty useful for an idea I have.

 

[DonAdam]

As a thought experiment for my players, rather than a set of rules, I broke alignment down into four components. They are still subdivided by the old axes, and a character's alignment would basically be determined by an "average" of sorts:

Law/Chaos (although I prefer the term "Orderly" to Lawful, since I come from a Judeo-Christian background in which Law and Good are synonymous):

Political Axis: Individualist, Neutral, Organic
This axis reflects, obviously, political beliefs. The individualist is characterized by a belief in libertarian or anarchical ideas, and sees any notion of "society as a whole" or "the state" as useful constructs but things with no inherent dignity or worth. The organic ideal is that society is a whole greater than the some of its parts, and that individuals must, at least to some extent, be subject to it. Communism, fascism, statism, and extreme nationalism fall into this category. A neutral position might be expressed as utilitarianism.
This axis was actually the inspiration for the whole system. It explains why a monk or paladin can revolt against a government without violating the lawful part of their alignment, which could be satisfied by the othe part, namely...

Discipline Axis: Rigid, Neutral, Free-spirited
This axis is a question of how the person pursues their personal ends. The Rigid person, in the extreme, is anal retentive in his organization. He is very disciplined and follows a rigid set of guidelines, and probably a strict schedule. Monks should be Rigid (though not necessarily as extreme as what I just described). The Free-spirited person does little planning and is very spontaneous.

Good/Evil:

Morality Axis: Moral/Neutral/Immoral
This axis represents a combination of two old (ie Aristotilean or Thomist) ways of looking at ethics, namely the person's adherence to negative moral norms and any moral virtues not associated with the next category. Will the person be dishonest (in the full sense of denying information to those with a right to it)? Will he use someone else as a mere object of sexual gratification? Will he murder an innocent? Does he infringe upon the dignity of others? Is he temperate in consuming food and drink? This is a difficult category to assess given competing ethical systems.

Charity Axis: Selfless, Neutral, Selfish
Note that I am using a restricted sense of the classic definition of charity, "to will the good of another." I am restricting this sense to not include negative moral norms (don't kill, don't steal, don't commit adultery) and instead restricting it to a sense of an active effort to do what the character sees is the good of another. A Selfless character is willing to make great personal sacrifices, maybe even risking his life, to help someone else. A neutral character would be willing to risk his life for a huge number of people or for a close friend, but not a stranger.

The political views issue is on its own, but the other three provide a good start on roleplaying one's character. Here are some sample combinations:

Rigid/Moral/Selfless: this could be an ascetic monk or disciplined paladin, who believes that it is through discipline that one can remain virtuous and give himself to others

Neutral/Moral/Selfless: this could be another ascetic monk who wants and tries to live rigidly but fails occasionally; his inconstancy sometimes lead to bad decisions, like drinking too much of the monastery wine, but he is always sorry

Free-spirited/Moral/Selfless: continuing with the religious example for ease of comparison, this might be a charismatic preacher whose passion for what is good drives him to be reckless at times, or a barbarian who would give anything to keep his people free from a tyrannical invader

?/Immoral/Neutral- this guy has right and wrong all mixed up but is loyal to his friends

Rigid/Moral/Selfish- This guy has the right ideas about personal morality, but is self-righteous and won't help anybody else- they're clearly deserving what they get for being sinners

etc etc

Edit: Having purchased Monte's BHM, I'm considering reworking this onto a scale. If anybody is terribly interested you can email me (check my profile) and if I get it done I'll send it to you.

 

[Kid Charlemagne]

There is also the concept of "taint" from the Oriental Adventures book.

 

[Kerrwyn]

Re: Re: Alignment Alternatives

Not quite an "alternative" but something different I did in a game once was make alignment more important.

Instead of Gods, the campaign world had "forces" of law, chaos, balance, good, and evil, that were as potent and real as anthropomorphic deities.

Each "force" had a set of 3 values, such as good=truth,love,courage; evil=doubt,contempt,self. Balance took all the values and combined them, such as truth+doubt=skepticism, love+contempt=compromise.

good and evil didn't play as black and white concepts, because the core of the ethics system allowed that "evil" could be productive and necessary. Unchecked Love, for instance, would lead to Martyrdom, just as unchecked Contempt would lead to Hatred. The concept of Balance (neutrality in alignment terms) was very important to the world.

When the players were into it, it worked out very well. The character core ended up being more about ethics than morals, which I think is a concept close enough to the "alternative" system you're discussing.

The idea for this came from Ultima 7 part 2 (the computer game), and I lifted the law, chaos, and balance stuff straight from there. It was the game that put a different twist on the standard Ultima virtues.

I've got the whole system written up if anyone's interested.

Wow, I kinda like that. Sign me up under "interested".

 

[hong]

Ah, someone's already mentioned Ultima, so I am forced, FORCED, I say, to pimp my writeup of the virtues for Britannia 3E:

http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/britannia/virtue.htm

 

[BiggusGeekus]

I am forced, FORCED, I say, to pimp my writeup of the virtues for Britannia 3E:

http://www.zipworld.com.au/~hong/dnd/britannia/virtue.htm

Friendly suggestion, oh mighty Oz Pimp: maybe an example on that page of what would warrant a virtue increase?

I like the benifits you get if you get to rank 5. Very Pendragon-y.

 

[Eternalknight]

You could try the honour system in Oriental Adventures.