I am posting Geeman's reply here to a topic that started somewhere else (Monks in Cerilia on the BRCS forum, I believe). Somehow his reply ended up in the Birthright Enhancement forum under a totally unrelated thread. So, to keep a good discussion going, here's what he wrote:

OK, let me try this again. I managed, somehow, to hit that odd combination
of keys that not only undid several of my points on this subject, but
actually sent the post.... Sneezing and keyboarding don`t mix.

At 04:43 PM 9/9/2003 +0200, Osprey wrote:

> I agree with most of what was said. Myers-Briggs alignments? Now
> that`s funny!

I think the D&D alignment is a goofy game mechanical expression of a not
very clearly defined concept, liberally borrowed from a few fantasy authors
(and badly misunderstood from those sources at that) and then used as the
basis of a lot of silly extrapolation into the game. In my experience it
really does wind up being a sort of short-hand for role-playing. While
there are many permutations of personality types possible under the banner
of "lawful good" characters, I`m sure we`ve all seen the stereotypical
version of that alignment played out with requisite smarm. Similarly, the
number of "chaotic evil" characters that wind up being played out as
utterly psychotic, remorseless murderers with a death wish that makes a
Kamikaze pilot look like Jain monk. That`s not 100% the fault of the
alignment system, since people have a tendency to go "lowest common
denominator" when it comes to both good/evil and characterization. It is,
however, an amazingly simplistic description of morality and IMO lends
itself to shallow interpretation.

I haven`t implemented this yet, but I really like the idea of a point based
"allegiance" system rather than the alignments of D&D. Basically one has a
point value (based on character level) that one assigns to various
DM-outlined concepts, organizations, gods, etc. A 10th level character
might have (if one were playing the Meyer`s/Briggs D20 game) Extrovert 2,
Feeling 3, Judging 5 as his allegiance values. I like this better than
alignments for BR in particular since we have all those nice

1. It provides an answer to the question "how evil?" that is occasionally
asked in gaming as it is no where else in the omniverse. That is, with a
point value assigned doing something as ubiquitous as detecting for evil
can be more intelligently done.

2. It allows for more areas of morality than law/chaos and good/evil.

3. It provides a system of loyalty to things like nations, religious
organizations, etc. Many people view "good" or "evil" as what is good or
bad for the organization they support which is, in effect, a
morality. It`s often a twisted and childish morality, but it`s a morality
nonetheless, and an allegiance system would reflect that kind of person.

4. It can be used as the basis of prereqs for prestige classes. A
blackguard might have to have `evil 5` in his allegiances, a "patriarch"
prestige class might have to have points in allegiance to that organization
amongst his allegiances, etc.

5. Using this sort of thing as a shorthand for role-playing is pretty much
inevitable, so a more articulated system at least gives players a broader
range of themes to express.

Gary