|
All I'm saying is that's how it worked in 4E; you could label yourself Good or Lawful Good if you felt like it and had a strong vision in mind for what that meant to you but doing so didn't qualify you for some class or another more than the guy who said "this poo poo is too complicated for a one- or two-word label" and put down "unaligned," only a bunch of people complained about this because of sacred cows and also because Chaotic Neutral didn't exist anymore or something, so now they're going back to full-on nine-point alignment because it's an internet meme and therefore too big to fail.
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 06:26
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:17 |
|
|
Yeah the justification of "everybody expects it so I guess we'll just throw it in" makes me wonder what the point even is of publishing a book. Why not just a little pamphlet that says "play whatever you think Dungeons and Dragons is from watching the Big Bang Theory and hearing that one Dr. Demento bit"? It would reduce the ecological footprint at least.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 06:36
|
|
|
Mainly I just think it's amazing...not in a "hey let's laugh at the stupid newbie" way but in an "I had honestly never considered that but it makes perfect sense when you think about it" way...that someone whose "Appendix N" includes things like Mass Effect, Jade Empire, and Dragon Age might come into D&D, sit down, and then be completely lost when it comes to alignment because they're expecting something like a branching dialogue path with different options corresponding to different alignments and instead it's nothing but a catalyst for circlejerk arguments and demotivational posters.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 06:57
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:Mainly I just think it's amazing...not in a "hey let's laugh at the stupid newbie" way but in an "I had honestly never considered that but it makes perfect sense when you think about it" way...that someone whose "Appendix N" includes things like Mass Effect, Jade Empire, and Dragon Age might come into D&D, sit down, and then be completely lost when it comes to alignment because they're expecting something like a branching dialogue path with different options corresponding to different alignments and instead it's nothing but a catalyst for circlejerk arguments and demotivational posters. Well sometimes it restricts your equipment or arbitrarily destroys your character. So you know, a well balanced and thought out system that nobody would try to game as hard as possible.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 07:01
|
|
|
Barudak posted:Well sometimes it restricts your equipment or arbitrarily destroys your character. So you know, a well balanced and thought out system that nobody would try to game as hard as possible. I really need to do a Murphy's Rules write-up on alignment. AD&D posted:Chaotic Neutral: Above respect for life and good, or disregard for life and promotion of evil, the chaotic neutral places randomness and disorder. Good and evil are complimentary balance arms. Neither are preferred, nor must either prevail, for ultimate chaos would then suffer. AD&D 2e posted:Chaotic Neutral: Chaotic neutral characters believe that there is no order to anything, including their own actions. With this as a guiding principle, they tend to follow whatever whim strikes them at the moment. Good and evil are irrelevant when making a decision. Chaotic neutral characters are extremely difficult to deal with. Such characters have been known to cheerfully and for no apparent reason gamble away everything they have on the roll of a single die. They are almost totally unreliable. In fact, the only reliable thing about them is that they cannot be relied upon! This alignment is perhaps the most difficult to play. Lunatics and madmen tend toward chaotic neutral behavior. 3e posted:Chaotic Neutral, "Free Spirit"
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 07:16
|
|
|
My first experience playing D&D was with 3rd edition and I remember getting to the chapter on alignment and thinking how weird it was that the description of chaotic alignments didn't match up with anything I had heard from webcomics/longtime players about chaotic hijinks. After reading it side by side with other editons I have to think the 3rd edition description was an intentional response to players complaining about disruptions from "chaotic stupid" players.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 07:45
|
|
|
For a lot of people "Chaotic Neutral" is alignment shorthand for "lol monkeycheese gonna play a kender wooooo stab the king in the balls and steal the Paladin's sword because I'm KUH-RAZY" and yeah, it probably had a foundation in AD&D2E where they flat-out tell you that Chaotic Neutral is the fishmalk alignment, like dangling a ball of tinfoil in front of That Guy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 08:01
|
|
|
Old D&D alignment system: Good characters: Expected to basically follow the plot Everything else: Sociopaths Edit: Oh, and to this day players think they are being hilarious when they play a paladin like a Dudley Do-Right moron.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 08:05
|
|
|
Evil Sagan posted:I feel bad for anyone that would play with a DM who pulls this sort of poo poo. Running a setting isn't a license to be a lovely Dungeon Master. Evil Sagan posted:But aren't campaign settings best when you take the good parts and leave the trash on the sidewalk? It seems to me that FR can never get so big or ridiculous that you couldn't just use the stuff you love. quote:Oh man, I hadn't even thought of newer players who had experience with Bioware-style Paragon/Renegade reputation systems coming into contact with nine-point alignment, that's amazing.  Wish they were more prevalent. Especially in an ebook age. 
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 08:45
|
|
|
Yeah, as far as alignment goes at my table I just ditch the whole stupid thing. Fine you're a Lawful Good Necromancer that's hanging out with an Evil Ranger. It never really comes up. However I do ask my players to give me a long game and a short game in regards to their character. Long Game is what your guy ultimately wants to do. "Become the world's finest swordsman" "Rescue my sister from Dickbag the Wizard" and "Restore the honor of the Grendelgrim name" would all be long game stuff. Things I as DM can hook you with every once in a while. Short game is stuff you care about right now. "I don't let anyone hit my friends" "I think all Wizards are liars" or "I love to gamble". Things that might get you in trouble and are general enough to come up at least once every few sessions. When they come up if my players play into their flaws they get some kind of bonus. Usually a bonus to a roll, big stuff doing something like refreshing an action point early or giving an extra use of an Encounter power. It's not perfect and at another table it'd probably fall apart but I'd like to hear that D&D was at least playing with the idea of something like this instead of "Well, freeing all those people is more Chaotic Good, so your Paladin loses xp for that."
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 08:47
|
|
|
FRINGE posted:CYOAs/Endless Quests/Dragon Tales/etc were the best way to learn about RP and consequences. I don't know which CYOA's you were reading but all the ones that I read seemed more interested in teaching me that the GM will, on occasion, straight-up murder your character on a whim because you decided not to talk to the creepy old woman three pages back or because you forgot to check behind the green door or something so your quest, and your life, end here. I mean, I suppose that's like a valuable lesson, but I don't recall a whole lot of learning to roleplay when I was Sommerswerding my way through the Lone Wolf series.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 08:52
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I don't know which CYOA's you were reading but all the ones that I read seemed more interested in teaching me that the GM will, on occasion, straight-up murder your character on a whim because you decided not to talk to the creepy old woman three pages back or because you forgot to check behind the green door or something so your quest, and your life, end here. I mean, I suppose that's like a valuable lesson, but I don't recall a whole lot of learning to roleplay when I was Sommerswerding my way through the Lone Wolf series. As far as DnD, I think they sort of taught a "style" of caution/exploration that worked for me/us in storytelling. More old-school faerie-tale and less Dragon Ball. Different flavors/preferences. (Yes I remember a couple that were ridiculous with the "choose the right door" type thing.)
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 09:13
|
|
|
Kai Tave posted:I mean, I suppose that's like a valuable lesson, but I don't recall a whole lot of learning to roleplay when I was Sommerswerding my way through the Lone Wolf series. I'm actually showing the Lone Wolf books to a friend, and we're very both very worried at how often Lone Wolf gets everyone killed. The only benefit to healing someone, it seems, is to just needlessly prolong the agony of their deaths.  OneThousandMonkeys posted:Old D&D alignment system: Is there such a thing as a good pen and paper morality system? Humanity in Vampire, for example, never really felt very fun or interesting. Because I guess, maintaining humanity was supposed to be unfun and problematic.  Similarly, Corruption in Dark Heresy and the various other Warhammer RPGs was meant to be annoying pain that you're supposed to actively avoid or somehow work around. I guess I was okay with the Light Side/Dark Side mechanics in Star Wars Saga Edition (though perhaps that was just because the section on it seemed fairly well written).I hear people praise Pendragon's morality system, but I don't know enough about it to judge it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 09:23
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:I'm actually showing the Lone Wolf books to a friend, and we're very both very worried at how often Lone Wolf gets everyone killed. The only benefit to healing someone, it seems, is to just needlessly prolong the agony of their deaths. What kind of idiot NPC would travel with that guy?
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 09:31
|
|
|
Not so much morality, but in terms of "writing the things my character stands for on my sheet" goes I've always liked Exalted's thing with intimacies and motivations.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 09:34
|
|
|
I can't really think of a great standout morality system in particular, but it's not hard to find any number of modern RPGs that offer incentives for player-characters to behave in certain ways or engage in certain behaviors. Most of them are some form of "engage in/be compelled to engage in [BEHAVIOR], get a bonus of some sort" be it bonus XP, a Fate Point, a bonus to your roll, etc." Savage Worlds, Reign, FATE, Unknown Armies, etc. The problem is that's not really how D&D alignment works. D&D alignment is mostly stick instead of carrot...XP penalties if you act against your alignment, Paladins falling from grace, Monks that have to stay Lawful or else, a way for the drow to tell who you are through your disguise spell, magic items that you can't use because you're the wrong alignment, etc. edit; actually I think the real division comes from the fact that in all of these other games the players are choosing an individual code/set of behaviors/passions/morality for their character while D&D alignment basically implies that there's one objective measure of morality/behavior which resides locked away within the GM's mind and you have to sort of navigate your way around it like a minefield. Like, if I make a Paladin-ish character in FATE and one of her aspects is "Leave No One Behind" then if I go ahead and rescue some eeeeeevil orcs from a cave-in the expected outcome of that is not "but orcs are evil and you're a Paladin, fall  " it's "yeah, that's a viable compel, have a Fate point and now you have a bunch of orcs you've just rescued, so what happens next?" But in D&D it's entirely down to the GM to decide whether my Paladin's actions are appropriate or not and what the proper response is and if I disagree with his interpretation my recourse is A). nerd argument or B). find a new GM.
Kai Tave fucked around with this message at 09:52 on Jun 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 09:35
|
|
|
If nerds really need a gridded chart that encapsulates the entire spectrum of the human psyche to sperg about, they might as well go with something like the Myers-Briggs type indicator. That's at least grounded on some kind of scientific study than whatever the current geek who writes the new D&D edition thinks "Chaotic Neutral" means.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 09:54
|
|
|
Bedlamdan posted:Similarly, Corruption in Dark Heresy and the various other Warhammer RPGs was meant to be annoying pain that you're supposed to actively avoid or somehow work around. Wait... You mean Dark Heresy wasn't a race to see who could get the most corruption the fastest (bonus points if you broke and/or numbed your GM before your character got taken away from you). Most stories I see tend to treat it as "Murder Hobos in Space and with authority". Edit: I wonder how well simply separating the Law-Chaos and Good-Evil axis from one another would be. Or simply removing the Good-Evil axis. Law and Chaos I can see being represented in the characters, but Good vs Evil is more of a grey area usually. Randalor fucked around with this message at 10:13 on Jun 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 09:57
|
|
|
I remember reading through some Dark Heresy adventure where the PCs are chasing some heretic or another through a crowd and one of the given options they describe as available to the players is gunning down civilians in order to clear an easier path...but doing so gives you Corruption points. Which always struck me as a fantastic misunderstanding of the sort of game Dark Heresy was meant to be. Like, the Imperium has a protocol for destroying entire planets and you're playing agents, or at least minions, of the people who give the order to do the planet-destroying, gunning down some civilians to capture a notorious heretic should be business as usual instead of "one step closer on the path to NPCdom."
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 10:02
|
|
|
Rexides posted:If nerds really need a gridded chart that encapsulates the entire spectrum of the human psyche to sperg about, they might as well go with something like the Myers-Briggs type indicator. That's at least grounded on some kind of scientific study than whatever the current geek who writes the new D&D edition thinks "Chaotic Neutral" means.  This thread is not the place for the long version, but that is an idea comprised of failure and un-fun. (IMO) Telling a real-life psych-type to play another one is less useful than the alignment grid for RP. (IMO) The only fun thing about it would be watching all the idiots claiming to be "masterminds". Yo would be better off using the Leary Interpersonal Circumplex if you wanted something that was "real" and might be fun.  edit: Really though, this stuff is less fun in a non introspective/philosophical therapy game than "chaotic evil" and "neutral good (chaotic)" and whatever you make those mean for your world. (IMO) Use old Dragon Mag comedy descriptive versions if its helpful (and fun). "Neutral Good (mean)" and Chaotic Evil (comedian)" and whatever else you feel like. FRINGE fucked around with this message at 10:49 on Jun 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 10:46
|
|
|
I was joking, but I can see how you could take my post seriously if you thought that you need to have some kind of personality chart in your elfgame.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 11:04
|
|
|
Rexides posted:I was joking, but I can see how you could take my post seriously if you thought that you need to have some kind of personality chart in your elfgame. Personality chart for dungeon RPGS: Vertical axis: measures violence, ranging from overt at the top to covert at the bottom. Horizontal axis: measures greed, ranging from overt at the left to covert at the right. There is no option to not be aggressive or greedy.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 11:17
|
|
|
My alignment system: I personally have all my characters find their Myers-Briggs type. Then I have them take one of those "What type of Pokemon are you?" online quizzes. Between the two we get a pretty good feel for the character's personality. It's a more complex system than regular alignment but that's the cost you pay for greatness. We had this one villain who was a total grass-type INFJ but our paladin, a ghost-type ENFP, put him out of his misery recently.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 12:44
|
|
|
AlphaDog posted:Personality chart for dungeon RPGS: Please choose your preferred reward structure: *Gold *Equipment *Weird Equipment *XP *Prestige Please choose your preferred method of conflict resolution: *Direct Violence *Indirect Violence *Diplomacy *Deception *Adventure Game Logic Splicer fucked around with this message at 12:47 on Jun 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 12:44
|
|
|
You forgot "Overwhelming Magical Power" as an option. Under both catagories. (USER WAS PUT ON PROBATION FOR THIS POST)
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 13:02
|
|
|
Splicer posted:*Adventure Game Logic >use sword on guard_ What can I say, I am a sophisticated role player.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 13:05
|
|
|
Splicer posted:Don't give an option to be more or less greedy, have a section to say what you are greedy about You could describe all of the characters my usual players make with these options. Now figure out a way to build a cosmology out of that list, and I'll use it in a game. Randalor posted:You forgot "Overwhelming Magical Power" as an option. Under both catagories. Only if it's always a better option than the others.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 13:07
|
|
|
Randalor posted:You forgot "Overwhelming Magical Power" as an option. Under both catagories.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 13:12
|
|
|
Rexides posted:>use sword on guard_ "Hey, I'll give you this really cool sword if you let me pass." AlphaDog posted:Only if it's always a better option than the others. I kinda wish the Armageddon spell from Ultima was in an tabletop RPG. It would make a good carrot/stick for your players. Just require it to use resources that don't exist at all. Like a thermonuclear warhead as a casting component.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 13:21
|
|
|
Hi! Just as a reminder, I would rather issue bans and probations than gas another thread for turning into poo poo. Reminder this is not YCS, nor is it a chat thread. Some of you may be getting stronger reminders.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 13:23
|
|
|
Arivia posted:Neither of those were present in pre-4E FR; and what's the problem with a big pantheon book anyway? PeterWeller posted:I love the Realms, and I think you're being too easy on the setting. Those frequent events constitute a metaplot, and Ed's characters do feel like power fantasies. MadScientistWorking fucked around with this message at 14:06 on Jun 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 13:39
|
|
|
MadScientistWorking posted:Isn't it true though that Ed doesn't actually run with any of the metaplot at all though? It was a major selling point of the last Forgotten Realms book was that it was completely devoid of any metaplot and that its how Ed runs it. As far as I know Ed still runs his version of FR which is still basically the very first AD&D version with absolutely none of the metaplot since. Also the best alignment is "write the name of the action hero your character would emulate the most." Realistically speaking alignment or morality or what have you usually is made to do one of two things. Either it's something that defines your character and thus should be very open ended a'la FATE aspects, or it's something that restricts your character and serves as a punishment mechanic a'la Corruption or Dark Side Points. The problem with D&D is that it vaguely tries to do both, but in a really lovely manner for both.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 15:02
|
|
|
ProfessorCirno posted:Also the best alignment is "write the name of the action hero your character would emulate the most." Back on topic: I noticed the spell Hunter's Mark in the recent playtest packet. It's encouraging in that it's a Vancian emulation of the 4e Ranger's Quarry mechanic, which means someone on the Next team may be able to admit having played 4e.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 17:11
|
|
|
Randalor posted:Going by how most "Paladin does an neutral/evil act that is justified and/or required for the greater good AND SO HE MUST FALL!" BS seems to be from adults and not teenagers/kids... I would say no. Best example of that kind of a choice is "Demon is possessing a baby and has opened a gate to hell that can only be closed by killing the baby. What do you do?" Damned if you do, damned if you don't. See if I'm playing a Paladin I'd say "Yeah, so that's the kind of choice that Bob the fighter sees here. I'm a holy man and my faith allows me to see the third option. I will lay my hands on the child and pray to God to drive out the foul demons." I mean, isn't that ALWAYS the answer to these sorts of dichotomies? "Faith will find a way." Bedlamdan posted:I hear people praise Pendragon's morality system, but I don't know enough about it to judge it. So lots of people would be bothered by that if you tried to import it to other games because it's "mind control." It's not an incentive or disincentive, it simply tells you how your character acts in situations where your virtues are relevant. Randalor posted:I wonder how well simply separating the Law-Chaos and Good-Evil axis from one another would be. Or simply removing the Good-Evil axis. Law and Chaos I can see being represented in the characters, but Good vs Evil is more of a grey area usually.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 17:13
|
|
|
Dodge Charms posted:Back on topic: I noticed the spell Hunter's Mark in the recent playtest packet. It's encouraging in that it's a Vancian emulation of the 4e Ranger's Quarry mechanic, which means someone on the Next team may be able to admit having played 4e. It's telling as hell that they gave it the same name as the World of Warcraft ability.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 17:17
|
|
|
moths posted:It's telling as hell that they gave it the same name as the World of Warcraft ability. I don't think its telling because I wouldn't be surprised if no-one involved in the process had played World of Warcraft or played it enough to know that Hunter's Mark exists. 5e feels like its designed solely within a bubble so having a convergent evolution towards the concept seems pretty plausible. As for alignment I always perfered orthopraxy/orthodoxy and individualist/heirarchical. Barudak fucked around with this message at 17:28 on Jun 25, 2013 |
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 17:24
|
|
|
I figured it as a nod to both 4e and WoW since they're the same thing, right? I guess they got the name from a playtester, since you're probably right about never touching anything designed after 1989. I play by the book / my own rules. (Circle one) I am a good guy / disruptive player. (Circle one)
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 17:35
|
|
|
moths posted:I figured it as a nod to both 4e and WoW since they're the same thing, right? I guess they got the name from a playtester, since you're probably right about never touching anything designed after 1989. Play tester? No no, 5e has feel testers. I assume if someone circles "disruptive player" you boot them from the game? That was the best thing about 4e's system in that there wasn't some vague rulesy-notion about being able to sit down at the table and be an unrepentant selfish rear end in a top hat which I've seen several people do.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 17:38
|
|
|
Yeah that's one of my biggest problems with the soon to be reinstated 9 alignment system; Any 2/3rds of the choices exist to validate and comfort special snowflakes who don't want to play on the same team as the rest of the team.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 18:04
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 17:17 |
|
|
Okay, so the thing about alignment is that it was originally designed to answer this: Will those guys try to kill me? (y/n) That's it. Brigands and vampires are chaotic, elves and unicorns are lawful. The more complex and comprehensive they made it, the dumber it got. Arivia posted:edit: Someone also tell me how good/bad The Kraken is. I want to get some but I'm not sure if it's worth buying. Rosalind posted:Has any other game design been as burdened by this idea of being true to its predecessors as D&D Next? PeterWeller posted:That's what it sounds like to me as well. In that interview thespaceinvader posted, Salvatore takes credit for the reset, and from his recent novels it sounds like it will revolve around the chosen of various gods, perhaps battling against different primordials. MadScientistWorking posted:I don't think Ed Greenwood is the problem at all because when you look at his writing its actually got some well written hooks and interesting concepts whereas when I look at stuff like the 3E book you end up getting way too much stuff without any hooks at all. ProfessorCirno posted:As far as I know Ed still runs his version of FR which is still basically the very first AD&D version with absolutely none of the metaplot since.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2013 18:53
|
|