The D&D Alignment system: too restrictive?

[Skink]

this randomly came up in my Character Application thread and im curious if anyone else has thoughts on it...

I find the D&D Alignment system to be incredibly restrictive. I have never had a character that I felt could acurately be placed in any given category... I find it incredibly unrealistic to play a character who acts solely witihn the boudaries of a narrow alignment category.

I know there is a more tri-axis based measure of alignment... so I dont understand why that isnt out on the surface... why dont characters have a value for each alignment critereon?
like
Chaotic: 23
Evil: 54
Lawful: 13

that person would qualify as what? Chaotic Evil? but they still have some lawful tendencies?...

well anyway... what are your thoughts? im sure I am not the first person in history to adress this issue

[undeadsteak]

Yes, its a bit restricitive, I suppose.. Just select True neutral if you wana be like that.. *Shrug.*

[Donegal]

I agree. For a heavy RP server like this one, where your background should be highly developed, Alignment should be nothing more than a guideline.

In my PnP games I treat it as such. The only problem that arises is from spells and spell-like effects that target alignment.

[Xym]

"that person would qualify as what? Chaotic Evil? but they still have some lawful tendencies?..."

You can play it like you have your numbers, and your char would be labeled as "Chaotic Evil" and you can have lawful tendancies. Being Chaotic does not mean that you can't follow some laws.

I don't believe that if you label your character Chaotic Evil that you are 100% Chaotic and 100% Evil. Thats just the overall intentions of your char.

I have a NE char that I play semi-good right now because I'm trying to trick people into liking him, but later on down the road when he gets more powerful and can stand up to people he will probably be perceived as much more evil than he is now. I have my char make some snide comments now and then, and blow people off once in awhile to kind of show that i'm not pure good. and if someone is already unconcious I dont feel the need to stop and heal them.

So to get to my point I think that the alignments, for the most part, are as restrictive as you make them.

[undeadsteak]

Lol, your the third Reyer btw. Daniel Reyer, Kashia Reyer, and now Xym Reyer XD. Or.. the names might be spelt different.

[Ethereal Edge]

Reyer's been the surname of four of my male characters for the past three years. I am the winner!

There's also a reason alignment is there, and in Dungeons and Dragons it's written in stone and the Forgotten Realms recognizes that. It's a matter of balance issues when you get to the heart of it, but it can lead to interesting roleplay. In the end alignment is indeed a guideline, but it's not one to be meddled with.

[Xym]

Yea, I know I'm the third Reyer, I had a small discussion with Ethereal Edge about it last night

[Akitsuki]

lawful chaotic good and evil can all be looked at in diffrent lights.. i think your views make you beleive that diffrent things are good. just keep in mind everything is relitive, if you think like that he system isn't realy very restrictive at all..

for instance a monk : Lawful Nuetral who is part of a monistary who preaches that you must be chaotic and kill everything... he does that... following the laws of his monestary that way even though he is doing CE stuff he is LN or LE depending

[Ethereal Edge]

That's a bad example, Akitsuki, because all alignments are objective in Dungeons and Dragons. Personal views may see actions as good, but in reality that doesn't do anything to their alignment. Plus all monk orders are under the guidance of a lawful deity, to my knowledge, meaning they won't take excessively chaotic actions.

[ronwue]

this randomly came up in my Character Application thread and im curious if anyone else has thoughts on it...

I find the D&D Alignment system to be incredibly restrictive. I have never had a character that I felt could acurately be placed in any given category... I find it incredibly unrealistic to play a character who acts solely witihn the boudaries of a narrow alignment category.

I know there is a more tri-axis based measure of alignment... so I dont understand why that isnt out on the surface... why dont characters have a value for each alignment critereon?
like
Chaotic: 23
Evil: 54
Lawful: 13

that person would qualify as what? Chaotic Evil? but they still have some lawful tendencies?...

well anyway... what are your thoughts? im sure I am not the first person in history to adress this issue

There are four values in the alignment two of which are the opposite of the other two. So you can't be chaotic and lawful at the same time. But then again, as the other people before me said, not necessarily actions have to be in the alignment, but the reason behind them.

[Eternal Serf]

I really hate the alignment system for players. It railroads them into silly concept type rules that make it difficult to actually 'roleplay' their character unless they play according to an almost dogma like set rules.

I remember the early palladian (not sure of the spelling) game that came out. It had a listing of what the different alignments would do in similar situations. I used that chart for my NPC's as it was really well thought out. For my players I tossed the alignment rules out and said use the rules as really basic guidlines.

As for classes that follow specific alignments I created 'Rules of the Order' for them. Paladins of specific gods had specific and clear rules. For example a Paladin of a War God had to always enter battle unless the enemy out numbered him greater than two to one, he had to aid women in distress, aid children in distress and give 4 parts of 10 of all his wealth to the temple. He also had to obey the orders of his superiors without question, unless they violated the other orders.

It isn't too hard to create some rules for players for each specific God/diety/order and make them dogma. This will give players some ideas of how they are expected to behave, while other players who don't wish to play 'ordered' classes can do what they want.

[ronwue]

If you look in the alignment description I think you can fit almost all types of people there. And it isn't unheard-of for a chaotic evil character to do something a paladin would agree with, as long as these acts are rare. And let's not forget that not all characters have the need to run around screaming "I'm evil die you all".

[Felnak]

I remember seeing in one of the old AD&D books, a grid system depicting the 9 possible alignments. Within each box were certain entries locating the alignment of certain types of beings. For example, within LG, the Upper Planar beings are extreme LG but some other LGs, including paladins, are located within LG but varying amounts toward NG or LN. Conversely, true demons are extreme CE but CE characters would not be so extreme CE. CE characters are located within CE but varying amounts toward CN or NE and could still be well within the CE alignment.

Even though these are grid boxes, they are not iron clad restrictions. In fact, they are a guideline and not a restriction at all. Simply stated, a being would act more extreme when the aligment was located in a more extreme part of the grid but would have to exhibit other actions to have the alignment located in other than the most extreme potion of the grid. For example, a CE character would, by definition comit acts of Lawful or Good (or Neutral if you must) in order to not have the most extreme CE alignment, which generally is reserved for Demons.

Another way to think of this is in order to occupy a certain location in the grid system a creature would have components of Good vs Evil and Law vs Chaos. Keep in mind a true demon may be 100% Chaotic and 100% Evil but Mr. Total Chaotic Evil Character is not 100% Chaotic and 100% Evil. Transform Mr. Total Chaotic Evil Character into a Demon and he may have a chance at pure CE perfection.

Felnak

[Ralek]

That's a bad example, Akitsuki, because all alignments are objective in Dungeons and Dragons. Personal views may see actions as good, but in reality that doesn't do anything to their alignment. Plus all monk orders are under the guidance of a lawful deity, to my knowledge, meaning they won't take excessively chaotic actions.

All monk orders, except one. *points to signature* Loners who like to talk alot.

Oh, and there's the monks of the Dark Moons, too. They're a bunch of Sharrans.

[CrimsonTears]

Maybe it's just me, but I can't see an order of strictly orderly members (monks) being anything but lawful

I mean, it's like a chaotic paladin order or a tribe of lawful barbarians