PDA

View Full Version : Alignments



John
11-30-1996, 12:00 AM
* This message contains the file 'blodtabs.txt', which has been
* uuencoded. If you are using Pegasus Mail, then you can use
* the browser's eXtract function to lift the original contents
* out to a file, otherwise you will have to extract the message
* and uudecode it manually.

begin 660 blodtabs.txt
M0FQO;V0@06)I;&ET:65S(&)Y($1E

John
11-30-1996, 12:00 AM
Last week I said I'd send in the blood abilities by derivation
tables, so here they are. I worked them out based on how many each
had in total, then worked them out as a percentage, so the
probablities are all the same, allowing for rounding errors.

Enjoy.

John.
"Once I was a lamb, playing in a green field. Then
the wolves came. Now I am an eagle and I fly in a
different universe."
"And now you kill the lambs," whispered Dardalion.
"No, priest. No one pays for lambs."
- David Gemmel, Waylander

Brian Stoner
10-30-1997, 09:34 PM
As the topic has come up, I wanted to share my view on alignments. For
me, alignments are simply a way to classify the various characters.
When I adjust a character's alignment it is to bring it more in line
with the way the character is played, not as some sort of punishment. I
also believe that good characters, even LG ones, occasionally do evil
things. Some sort of repentence may be necissary for the religious
ones. Remorse is necissary as well. Although they cannot reverse or
even make up for an evil act, they do indicate that the character is of
the proper alignment. Azrai's blood cannot change a character's
alignment, but it can tempt them. Everyone, even the greatest Paladin,
will at sometime let themselves be overcome with temptation. But there
are ways for it to be dealt with without changing their alignment or
even forcing the Paladin to change classes. Certainly, the DM has the
responsibility of carrying out the act's consequences, but redemption is
always an option.

Brian

Glenn Robb
11-01-1997, 04:56 AM
Brian Stoner wrote:

> As the topic has come up, I wanted to share my view on alignments. For
> me, alignments are simply a way to classify the various characters.
> When I adjust a character's alignment it is to bring it more in line
> with the way the character is played, not as some sort of punishment. =
I
> also believe that good characters, even LG ones, occasionally do evil
> things. Some sort of repentence may be necissary for the religious
> ones. Remorse is necissary as well. Although they cannot reverse or
> even make up for an evil act, they do indicate that the character is of
> the proper alignment. Azrai's blood cannot change a character's
> alignment, but it can tempt them. Everyone, even the greatest Paladin,
> will at sometime let themselves be overcome with temptation. But there
> are ways for it to be dealt with without changing their alignment or
> even forcing the Paladin to change classes. Certainly, the DM has the
> responsibility of carrying out the act's consequences, but redemption i=
s
> always an option.
>

My view of alignment coincides with the AD&D view. I believe that alignm=
ent
should be an internal compass rather than an external strait jacket (reme=
mber
Palladium and Rifts?). I also believe alignment shows where the characte=
r
stands in the war between Evil and Good. A man aligned with Law and Good=
often
is forced to do evil acts (killing) in an evil situation (war).

But a Lawful Good ruler would not institute war ("Oh great axe, I've
feared to call upon you again, but this war cannot be avoided," the Grea=
t Ak
in the Story of Santa Claus). While a neutral good warrior or lawful neu=
tral
king might (e.g. Henry V). But a Lawful Evil dictator will institute war=
if it
serves his purpose (Hitler).

But there is another side. Alignment is not personality. For instance, =
you
can play an SOB who is Lawful Good (as long as he stays Lawful Good, anyw=
ays),
or a chivalristic chaotic evil anti-paladin. Personality is a complete,
separate thing. Therefore, I often tell my players to think of a demeano=
r, or
basic personality trait, before they choose their alignment.

Of course they would most probably pick the alignment that is the most
compatible to that demeanor. But I hope you can see my point. Which is
personality is completely different from alignment. And it's often perso=
nality
that causes the alignment shifts.

=97 Elton Robb
"Your Generously Liberal GM."

Trizt
11-01-1997, 08:17 AM
On 01-Nov-97, Glenn Robb (GLENNROBB@prodigy.net) wrote about Re: [BIRTHRIGHT]
- - Alignments:


- ->Brian Stoner wrote:

- ->My view of alignment coincides with the AD&D view. I believe that alignment
- ->should be an internal compass rather than an external strait jacket
(remember
- ->Palladium and Rifts?). I also believe alignment shows where the character
- ->stands in the war between Evil and Good. A man aligned with Law and Good
- ->often is forced to do evil acts (killing) in an evil situation (war).

No I have deleted much of the original mail and some may say I did do that to
much and have missed to read that part.

- ->Of course they would most probably pick the alignment that is the most
- ->compatible to that demeanor. But I hope you can see my point. Which is
- ->personality is completely different from alignment. And it's often
- ->personality that causes the alignment shifts.
Wartimes does change the alignment ALOT, if we take a look at our world, say
pre world war 2 or bosnia. Here most of the future consentration camp guards
where the kind family father which we would class as LG, but when the war
begun and they become more "chaotic" and when they then became camp guards
they become those "monsters" who killed and raiped. Afterwards many years they
begun to move back to the life they had before the wars, now followed by the
memories of what happened. So personality isn't the only alignment changer,
the situation (spl?) does alot for your alignment. So a strict alignment is
quite bad as it's sortof is in adnd.

//Trizt of Ward^RITE

-

Tripp Elliott
11-01-1997, 04:16 PM
Glenn Robb wrote:

> But a Lawful Good ruler would not institute war ("Oh great axe, I've
> feared to call upon you again, but this war cannot be avoided," the Great Ak
> in the Story of Santa Claus). While a neutral good warrior or lawful neutral
> king might (e.g. Henry V). But a Lawful Evil dictator will institute war if it
> serves his purpose (Hitler).

I agreed with virtually everything you had to say except the part about
LG rulers not starting wars.

Let's say I'm the LG ruler of Baruk-Azhik, or Coeranys, if you ask me, I
am perfectly justified in sending my armies across the borders of the
Chimaeron in order to kill the Chimaera and free those people from her
oppression. Or if I'm the LG ruler of Mhoried[and a bit suicidal] I
could hurl my forces against the Gorgon. It's all just a matter of why
am igoing to war really.

Ok, that's my 2GB on this.

Tripp

Tripp Elliott
11-01-1997, 04:20 PM
Brian Stoner wrote:

> Interesting point... My point of view is that alignment directly
> affects personality and the opposite. Essentially, the two are tied
> together. As I see it, alignment is related to the characters moral
> stance, which is part of personality.
>
> Brian

I'm going to commit a mortal sin here and use a Dragonlance Character to
Illustrate a point on the Birthright Mailing List.

The characters Sturm and Steel from Dragonlance are my subjects. Sturm
is your standard LG Paladin while I would call Steel your standard LE
AntiPaladin. That's all fine and well so far as alignment goes, but
from a personality standpoint the two were virtually identical.
Chivalry, honor, respect of womanhood all of that occur in both, despite
their alignments.

Ok, enough of that from me.

Tripp

James Ruhland
11-01-1997, 05:38 PM
But a Lawful Good ruler would not institute war.

Why not? If he does so within the accepted rules of warfare, why should he
be any diferent than the other good (Neutral and Chaotic) people you
mentioned? Is tolerating extream evil in a neighboring land just because
you don't want to institute a war Lawful Good?

But there is another side. Alignment is not personality. For instance,
you
can play an SOB who is Lawful Good (as long as he stays Lawful Good,
anyways),
or a chivalristic chaotic evil anti-paladin.

Within limits alignment is not personality; but you have to admit it
influences it. I, for one, could see a chivalristic lawful-evil dude (obeys
the code, etc), but not likely a chaotic evil one (no time for such rules,
changes with the wind--he might be polite to thouse with more power than
him, but would be crewl to the weak). Read the alignment descriptions; to a
large degree your behavior (thus personality) is what causes your alignment
to be what it is. "he's kind to children and small animals, courtious to
ladies, never steals or betrays a friend. Oh, and he's chaotic evil."

> Wartimes does change the alignment ALOT, if we take a look at our world,
say
> pre world war 2 or bosnia. Here most of the future consentration camp
guards
> where the kind family father which we would class as LG, but when the war
> begun and they become more "chaotic" and when they then became camp
guards
> they become those "monsters" who killed and raiped...

I hope I don't insult anyone, but, IMO, the alignments didn't change. Can
they really be said to have been LG when, the first time the oportunity
arose, they acted as they did? I mean, evil types may live somewhat quiet
lives (expressing their nature in less open ways), but their true nature
comes out when social order breaks down, be it temporary (a power outage
that causes thouse with little respect for others and their property to
take advantage of the situation to rob, beat, and rape others) or for a
longer time (Beirut, the former Yugoslavia; when these type of folks
engaged in similar acts for a longer period of time). I don't think that
after something like that you can assume that mild mannered Dr. Mengele in
pre-war Germany was a LG type, becoming CE during the war, and then
reverting back to LG after it.

I wasn't gonna talk about this anymore, but some people seem to need
a...clarification.

> Why do you say NOW? It has always been written this way in the rule
book,
> and I don't believe (although I could be istaken) that this is a "new
> rule" or a clarification.

If you read the whole paragraph, you'll notice a little phrase that refers
to Ed asking for advice on rule changes etc? Remember that? Perhaps I
wasn't entirely clear, so let me spell it out: When the game came out, and
up to this point, for the entire time, you could use RPs to influence the
level of the province. But perhaps *IN THE FUTURE* it might be a good idea
to disalow that, because it makes ruling up province levels too easy. I.E.
*NOW* you can use RPs to do so, as you always could, but I think *IN THE
FUTURE* you should only be able to use RPs to rule up holding levels, not
province levels. OK?

> the books seem to indicate this is the effect. Remember, guilds don't
> make all their money though trade routes. There is a lot of business to
> be made from the product of the guild itself to the local populace.
> Prodicing a product or selling a service can be a monopoly in a
region..If
> I have a guild of 75% of the blacksmiths in a province, I guess I control
> 75% of that particular part of the economy. In BR, I believe it is
> assumed the guilds are the Major product or service af that particular
> region, thus ending up as roughly the majority of the provinces economy..

Ok, so that means if you control a Guild (4) in a province (4) you control
everything; all the agricultural land included. (what do the
aristocrats/nobles have?), where do the other regents (landed, temple) get
off getting any money at all without your leave? IMO, my suspension of
disbelief just crashed big time if guilds are *this* monopolistic. They're
practically Stalin & Mao's ideal, then.

Trizt
11-01-1997, 06:30 PM
On 01-Nov-97, James Ruhland (jruhlconob@sprynet.com) wrote about Re:
[BIRTHRIGHT] - Alignments:

- ->> Wartimes does change the alignment ALOT, if we take a look at our world,
- ->say
- ->> pre world war 2 or bosnia. Here most of the future consentration camp
- ->guards
- ->> where the kind family father which we would class as LG, but when the war
- ->> begun and they become more "chaotic" and when they then became camp
- ->guards they become those "monsters" who killed and raiped...

- ->I hope I don't insult anyone, but, IMO, the alignments didn't change. Can
- ->they really be said to have been LG when, the first time the oportunity
- ->arose, they acted as they did? I mean, evil types may live somewhat quiet
- ->lives (expressing their nature in less open ways), but their true nature
- ->comes out when social order breaks down, be it temporary (a power outage
- ->that causes thouse with little respect for others and their property to
- ->take advantage of the situation to rob, beat, and rape others) or for a
- ->longer time (Beirut, the former Yugoslavia; when these type of folks
- ->engaged in similar acts for a longer period of time). I don't think that
- ->after something like that you can assume that mild mannered Dr. Mengele in
- ->pre-war Germany was a LG type, becoming CE during the war, and then
- ->reverting back to LG after it.

I didn't say that everyone did do go from LG->CE->LG, only most of them, and
if we would look at Dr. Mengele, he was quite freindly and helpful when he
lived in Paraguay (spl?, I think it was there he lived after the war). I can't
be certant about this as it's not confirmed that he was he.

To the point why I say that happenings like wars changes alignement it's for I
read an "medical" report about peoples mentality during wartimes. Humans
becomes extremle crule and does things which they wouldn't have done during
peacetime and would have voted for a death penalty for a such action if they
would have been in the jury. R. Sobel at Pentagon could prolly inform you more
about how we do work when something like war happens.
//Trizt of Ward^RITE

-

Glenn Robb
11-03-1997, 12:30 AM
> --
> hello, Adam Theo here,
> ok, sorry for all of these posts, but i'm trying to reply to all that's
> in my mailboxes in the next two days.
> i've done away with alignments.
> there you have it.
> i instead have the player choose a few descriptive words of his char.
> and we use a word or two for things like Detect Alignment and the
> bloodabilty that does the similar thing.
> how's this sound?

Let me buy Alternity or Future Law and get back to you on that one.

=97 Elton Robb

Trizt
11-03-1997, 12:35 PM
On 02-Nov-97, Adam Theo (adamtheo@usa.net) wrote about Re: [BIRTHRIGHT] -
Alignments:

- ->hello, Adam Theo here,
- ->ok, sorry for all of these posts, but i'm trying to reply to all that's
- ->in my mailboxes in the next two days.
- ->i've done away with alignments.
- ->there you have it.
- ->i instead have the player choose a few descriptive words of his char.
- ->and we use a word or two for things like Detect Alignment and the
- ->bloodabilty that does the similar thing.
- ->how's this sound?

Hmmm... sounds like a quite good thing to do. I have thought another way, not
quite as good as yours, but it will keep the alignments.

I was thinkgin of using two alignments, one which shows how the person does
when among his/her race and friends and one for contact with other people and
other races. Here is a small eg with Nisse, a human fighter.

Nisse has the alignment LG/NE which would mean that he does almost everything
for his friends and/or those of the same race/community as he, while he puts
him self before everyone else when it comes to strangers and other races.

Let say that the ship he was traveling with sunk and he managed to get on a
small rowboat which was made for 2 persons, but which could handle upto 4
persons without for risk that it would sink. He wouldn't let the elven maid to
get onboard, but he would gladly help his 6 friends upto the boat and gladly
jump into the sea if that would mean that the others would survive.

But yes, it would be quite much to keep track of and I don't think that a none
computerised RPG should have alot of extra checks as rules in my opinion gets
in second place while phun comes first (for both DM and player at the same
time).

//Trizt of Ward^RITE

-