What Alignment is Most-Often Played Incorrectly?

[Cornuto]

And, seeing as I'm feeling stern today; Clerics! Divine Casters! Learn your lore! If you don't learn your dogma and carry on ignoring, or worse utterly flouting it, it you stand a very large risk of loosing your ability to cast divine spells.

This times a thousand.

[Doubtful]

And me!

Uri made a very good post on exactly this not that long ago.
Read the full thing here: http://www.sundren.org/forum/showthread.php?t=11343

And, for the sake of clarity, here is the PHB definition from that post:

"Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favour new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it.

"Law" implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority and reliability. On the downside , lawful can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgementalness and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that lawful behaviour creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.

"Chaos" implies freedom, adaptability and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. those who promote chaotic behaviour say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.

Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has normal respect for authority and feels neither compulsion to obey nor compulsion to rebel. She is honest but can be tempted into lying and deceiving others.

Devotion to law or chaos may be a conscious choice, but more often it is a personality trait that is recognised rather than being chosen. Neutrality on the lawful/chaotic axis is usually simply a middle state, a state of not feeling compelled toward one side or the other. Some few neutrals however espouse neutrality as superior to law or chaos, regarding each as an extreme with its own blind spots and drawbacks.

Animals and other creatures incapable of moral action are neutral. Dogs may be obedient, and cats free spirited, but they do not have the moral capacity to be truly lawful or chaotic."

[KimKandor]

I'd have to say I'm totaly opposite you Bedlam, I love DnD alignments and feel PCs should play those alignments or suffer shifts DM imposed. Not to be a hardcore jerk but thats why the alignments are there in the first place, you select them as a guidline for how your PC is to be oriented.

Some classes require particular alignments for a reason, if a player chooses such an alignment so they can take a class and RPs totaly differently, or not as a PC with such alignment should, they're metagaming and the alignment should be changed and class dropped. Now I'm not saying it should be draconian, but the rules are there for a reason and DnD is the set we're using. Of course PWs can make changes to these but I would also argue major things such as alignments and whether you must RP them or not is a foundation to this game and shouldn't be changed.

To be honest, alignments and now factions here on Sundren are some of the most overlooked and misplayed things which many players just seem to ignore in my opinion. Not that I would judge anyones playstyle, but from a rule standpoint and how I would interprate those rules it does seem not many follow them with any faithfullness at all. Paladins do have detect evil, as a primary skill which should be used.

I'm all for more strict enforcement of alignments and more shifts based on PCs actions. THis would require more monitoring by DMs of course and probably is a lot to ask but would make a huge difference in how the PCs on the server relate to one another in a more DnD fashion.

To elaborate just a bit, before I would expect DMs to start changing a PCs alignment there should be a guidline posted for how certain alignments should or could be RPd with some expamples of different variations. I would also hope DMs would send a PM to the player telling them they are considering a shift and why, and let the player respond, perhaps there's some IC reason their actions or disposition is such at the particular moment.

Just my 2 cents.

[BedlamX]

"Lawful characters tell the truth, keep their word, respect authority, honor tradition, and judge those who fall short of their duties. Chaotic characters follow their consciences, resent being told what to do, favour new ideas over tradition, and do what they promise if they feel like it."

This is the main reason I hate the system. If you (or especially a DM) are a rules lawyer, no one of Lawful alignment can ever tell a lie. Period. No paladin can lie to an evil necromancer to get him where he wants him or use misinformation to get the greater good done. I am all for the keeping one's word fitting into Lawful (or at least keeping one's "word of honor" if LE), but the rules seem to state there is no grey area for lawful. As stated, some classes require a certain alignment. Personally, I am playing a LG character that should, in no way, shape, or form really be that due to the class. But, due to the PRC requirements and the particular diety, it is the only option. Again...no grey area even though the PRC does fit well into the ethos of the diety.

I have always had problems tagging my characters in D&D with a proper alignment based on how I play them. It is not something new, it just comes up when someone complains that "someone of that alignment would not act that way." To this I usually say "bull shit." Everyone, no matter how good or evil they are...no matter how lawful or chaotic they are...will eventually do something that does not fit into that pigeon-hole. Evil and chaotic can get away with this by saying it is to advance their agenda (especially dealing with evil guys doing a good deed) or just a whim of choice (chaos at its finest). Lawful or good are expected to stay rigidly conformist to what I call the "superman syndrome." Meaning they have to do everything on the up-and-up and for the sake of goodness. Black and white view of the world. No grey area.

All that said, I have rarely run into a rules lawyer so strict that they don't see alignments as "guidelines" instead of rigid and unbendable rules. If they did, all toons with the same alignment would react the exact same way to every situation. If all alignments, as writen in the rules, were followed to the letter, the vast majority of characters would never interact well (unless they were the exact same alignment).

Check out the Palladium alignment system some time and see how they did it as a pretty good (not perfect by any means) way of making them make more sense in a more real world fashion.

[GodBeastX]

I was looking for D. All of the Above

Also this is a poor way to look at alignments:

I'd have to say I'm totaly opposite you Bedlam, I love DnD alignments and feel PCs should play those alignments or suffer shifts DM imposed.

I think players should play a personality they like, take a best crack at a starting alignment for it and just stick to the personality regardless of alignment. If it means L/G becomes C/E in a week, who cares? As long as you're true to the personality.

[BedlamX]

*points up nodding*

I knew I liked you for a reason


And not just cuz you said my wife's toon has nice boobs, either

[GodBeastX]

Uhhh...

I ONLY LOOKED! I DIDN'T TOUCH! <_< >_>

[Cornuto]

*gets popcorn, positions chairs to better allow them to be thrown*

[Maevan2]

alignment. If it means L/G becomes C/E in a week, who cares? As long as you're true to the personality.

But that ruins my mega uber powerbuild i had in mind! *cries*

[Cornuto]

But that ruins my mega uber powerbuild i had in mind! *cries*

One less character to delete.

[KimKandor]

I was looking for D. All of the Above

Also this is a poor way to look at alignments:



I think players should play a personality they like, take a best crack at a starting alignment for it and just stick to the personality regardless of alignment. If it means L/G becomes C/E in a week, who cares? As long as you're true to the personality.

Thanks for agreeing with me, if a PC plays his personality and suffers a shift, thats exactly what I am promoting. I wasn't promoting strict adherance to the chosen alignment, just proposing that when it's RPd out of alignments shifts are given.

[prismaticcrow]

I think players should play a personality they like, take a best crack at a starting alignment for it and just stick to the personality regardless of alignment. If it means L/G becomes C/E in a week, who cares? As long as you're true to the personality.

This statement is full of pure win. In total agreement.

[KimKandor]

I know it's poor nettiquette to reply to one own post but I had this other thing here in mind. :P

<snip>

Personally, I am playing a LG character that should, in no way, shape, or form really be that due to the class. But, due to the PRC requirements and the particular diety, it is the only option. Again...no grey area even though the PRC does fit well into the ethos of the diety.

<snip>

This is exactly my point, these alignment requirements are there for reeason, perhaps for balance, perhaps because the PRC was designed for such alignments. Choosing LG so you can take a particular PRC is metagaming if you don't intend to RP the PC with that alignment, of course if shifts were given, then the alignment would change and the PRC would be unattainable as it should be.

[BedlamX]

Personally, I would like to see alignments just done away with. If you can change alignments by changing your personality...what true purpose do they achieve? All they do is let you pick this class or that one, really. I never understood why, due to alignments, you could not be a paladin/bard...but you can be a paladin/rogue. I've been playing D&D since the late '70s and have never understood the alignments. Only part of the game i have never liked.

Write a backstory. Create a personality. Stick to it. No need for alignments other than game mechanics.

[DM_Equinox]

I like to view alignment as a ~descriptor~ for your character. The alignment follows your actions and not the other way round. Your alignment does not force your actions, but rather your actions influence your alignment.

If your class choices then don't go with what that descriptor says, then perhaps your character made a bad career choice and needs to rethink his or her priorities.