Alignment Change System

[Nekira Sudacne]

I don't really see the point of rolling to see how your characters concious effects them. Alignment has never been impossible to violate. Occasionally good people do something bad for reasons they don't understand and occasionally bad people do good things for reasons they don't understand. if it becomes a pattern due to a revelation or how they decide they feel about things their alignment gradually shifts.

As far as the actual system goes, I guess it works okay for what it is, I just am not sure why it's necessary compared to players just roleplaying their alignments and any changes thereto. Just because your character is starting to act a bit out of alignment dosn't mean they are playing their character wrong, it means sometimes peoples alignments change over time.

[Killer Cyborg]

Not bad.

[KillWatch]

Not sure if this has been covered, but one day when I was running Chaos Earth, one of my players made a valid point that in a setting like that, a character's alignment would be all over the board. Using the "real life" example that if being chased by a demon, and one of their friends tripped and fell, well, that friend would most likely be on his own, whether the others are "good guys" or not.

-nope. that's their inner core. we see them on the news. people risking their lives for others, sacrificing their own well being for others. That is the essence of good. Most people are selfish. Most people aren't tested in such extremes. They SAY they'd like to behave in such and such a way, but the truth is most of us won't do what's right. If left to ourselves, with no one watching, we will usually act in our own best interests.
Good will go to work day after day, ride the train home, pick up groceries and think that they will do what's right when the time comes. But when it does, they will be the ones jumping down on the tracks without a thought to get a fellow being off of those rails seconds before a train comes.

Plus, I always felt like it was a cop out when I'd use the old "Well you wouldn't (or would) do that because you're alignment dictates that you wouldn't (or would)." So I came up with a simple way of progressing character alignments. Posting it here to see what others think.
-Ask: is that what your character would do? don't tell them. Let them wrestle with it. If they go bad then allow it. Keep track of good vs selfish vs evil acts they do. And should any test come up say like a magical sword that only accepts good wielders or something is introduced drop the bomb shell.
But good acting selfish can have excellent RP opportunities as well. Guilt. They begin drinking, doing drugs, having nightmares, getting involved in destructive relationships, taking on suicidal risks etc, anything to alleviate the pain of the guilt or to be forgiven. But that is on the player...
Selfish says well it sucks to be you/better you than me
Evil says lets stop and watch them burn

Note that this system is for characters with "normal" ME stats (below 20). It could work with higher, but would require some modification.
-I've always had a problem with Palladium bonuses. According to Palladium Einstein gets a +1% to scholastic skills

First, assign each alignment (minus Aberrant) 5 points each. Whatever alignment a character chooses would start with three points (this is to prevent any immediate alignment changes). So as an example, your PC starts with three points in Scrupulous.

Now, during play, whenever a PC chooses to do something outside of his/her alignment, like a Scrupulous character torturing someone for info, they'd have to make a Mental Endurance check. They'd roll a D20 against they're ME stat, attempting to get lower than their stat. Of course, negative modifiers would be assigned based on the severity of the action, like a -5 for the guilt this Scrupulous character would feel. So if the character has an ME of 14, the player would want to roll a 9 or less.

The Modifiers for the roll would be based off of the deed. So any "good" character committing cold-blooded murder might have a -10 on their ME for the purposes of the roll. You can also make the PC make the roll when they experience something horrifying, like witnessing a loved one die violently, or being buried alive in a mass grave.

If the roll is successful, then good deal. The character feels remorse but isn't broken up about it. If the roll fails, they're grief-stricken and loose an alignment point. If the PC looses all alignment points assigned to that particular alignment, he/she drops to the next alignment down. (So if our Scrupulous character lost all three points, he'd now drop to Unprincipled, with 5 alignment points to loose before he drops to Anarchist).

Of course, you can award alignment points when a PC does something outstanding, like saving the lives of others, or jumping in front of a laser blast to save a kid from getting his head vaporized (this is why you start with three points in the chosen alignment. So our Scrupulous character would immediately jump to Principled the first time he did something chivalrous).

The Aberrant alignment would come in once a PC drops all the way to Diabolic (and earning themselves a random obsession or other insanity). Once the Diabolic character does enough good deeds to raise their alignment, they'd go up to Aberrant.

I know it's not a perfect system. I based it loosely off of Vampire: The Masqurade's "Hierarchy of Sins". So the more evil one becomes, the harder it will be to loose alignment points (and the less the negative modifier will be when making ME checks).

What do you think?

-um it takes out the RPing of it. Everyone slips and makes mistakes and does the I wish I would have thing. In the alignments there are wills and will nots in among the sometimes, tries, mights. Its the absolute statements that are important. If you want a point system assign each 1 point. If they ever lose all their points they shift to the most appropriate alignment. However if they play it out and try to repent or something they get the points back. But really this is more for your record keeping. Let the players know what you are doing, but it should only come up with magic and auras, or others who are sensitive to these things. Children don't like them, dogs growl, etc
In VTM you gain willpower by playing your character. do it that way

[Beatmeclever]

I think that if the player has his character do something that is not in accordance with his alignment, he chose the wrong alignment for his character. If your alignment say you will run into a burning building to save some one you don't know and you don't want to run into a burning building for a stranger, you are not of that alignment. You cannot slip from alignment to alignment simply because you feel like acting differently. It is playing in the alignments that tell the player what this character (who might be a completely different kind of person than they are) will act in a situation where the player might stand and watch the building burn. The cop out is allowing players to violate their alignment without making them roleplay the repercussions. Rolling dice to solve every situation is NOT roleplay, it's roll play.

[Nekira Sudacne]

I think that if the player has his character do something that is not in accordance with his alignment, he chose the wrong alignment for his character. If your alignment say you will run into a burning building to save some one you don't know and you don't want to run into a burning building for a stranger, you are not of that alignment. You cannot slip from alignment to alignment simply because you feel like acting differently. It is playing in the alignments that tell the player what this character (who might be a completely different kind of person than they are) will act in a situation where the player might stand and watch the building burn. The cop out is allowing players to violate their alignment without making them roleplay the repercussions. Rolling dice to solve every situation is NOT roleplay, it's roll play.

It is a bit extreme to say alignment is one-and-done you picked the wrong alignment if you make one mistake. Characters are human and so are their players (Well okay, in Rifts characters might not be human, but).

Alignment is more like a grade, than a stairwell. you can slide up and down without fundamentally turning their axis. Maybe, just maybe, a character sees a burning building and looks away, because he dosn't think he can help (he tells himself). Maybe a good character turns a blind eye and dosn't question how one captured demon was interrogated.

And on the flip side, Maybe an evil character helps out a random stranger because he was in a good mood that day. maybe he decides there are lines even he won't cross (Such as evil goddess tolmet refusing to accept mistreatment of children, due to personal abuse suffered as a child, dispite otherwise being a sterotypical diabolic death goddess). and maybe some black market racketeer runs orphanages in their spare time.

If you read every alignment as unbending codes you cannot violate even once, you get nonsense, because humans are fickle, as above.

[eliakon]

The idea that a person will always do the 'right thing' (based on their alignments) every time is a nice idea, but not very realistic. Look at how people react in natural disasters, or wars, or the like. Some 'good' people will do horrible things, or selfish things. And some horrible people will suddenly do the most noble of feats. Alignment isn't mind control, and people aren't (usually) unthinking robots. Its your guide, what you aspire to be. You might not always do it, but you try.
That said if a person is doing the different thing all the time.....If Mr. Principled ignores a burning building once, so be it. If he ignores EVERY burning building (and doesn't say...have a phobia of fire, or a vulnerability to fire or the like) THEN I would start talking about changed.
If the Unprincipled character kills a villain out of hand, that's something he will have to live with. If he starts to kill ALL his enemies 'just to be safer' then he is on a quick path to Anarchist (at best)

[KillWatch]

I disagree, eliakon. Good people won't behave badly. There are plenty of people who won't go out and loot. Again everyone wants to think they are good and decent people. But they aren't. We believe this until we are tested with doing the right thing or the wrong thing. Most of us aren't tested in these ways. and when we are we usually fail. THAT is who we are. Now if we don't like who we are, we can change it, but we can't change it until we are aware of it. When we behave badly and want to be good, hell even if we are good we can make mistakes, but it is then in the role playing-guilt, regret, nightmares, addiction what impact will that have on the character?

However if they are doing whatever they want without addressing alignment then a) don't reward them for RPing alignment or playing in character.b) In interactions with others when alignment is important then gauge where they are on the alignment scale and apply it as such. Let the other players get involved to. Just because he is a PC doesn't mean they are immune from PC scrutiny. The others should ask; do we really want to be working with this guy? Yes? continue. No? You might have a new villain

[eliakon]

I disagree, eliakon. Good people won't behave badly. There are plenty of people who won't go out and loot. Again everyone wants to think they are good and decent people. But they aren't. We believe this until we are tested with doing the right thing or the wrong thing. Most of us aren't tested in these ways. and when we are we usually fail. THAT is who we are. Now if we don't like who we are, we can change it, but we can't change it until we are aware of it. When we behave badly and want to be good, hell even if we are good we can make mistakes, but it is then in the role playing-guilt, regret, nightmares, addiction what impact will that have on the character?

However if they are doing whatever they want without addressing alignment then a) don't reward them for RPing alignment or playing in character.b) In interactions with others when alignment is important then gauge where they are on the alignment scale and apply it as such. Let the other players get involved to. Just because he is a PC doesn't mean they are immune from PC scrutiny. The others should ask; do we really want to be working with this guy? Yes? continue. No? You might have a new villain

Then there are very, very, VERY good people out there.
This is not 'going out and looting' this is 'can not violate EVER ANY part of the system' So they cant EVER take 'dirty money' EVER, even once.
Some one who never broke ANY of the alignment restrictions, EVER, AT ALL? Most people would call that a saint.....
So either most people are actually anarchist, AND have to wait until they have a severe test to find out, then can pay some ludicrous price because 'they are not acting in character' because they are not really good people like they thought, but anarchists because they can't put another persons life above their own.
That's, in my opinion, not an alignment system, that's a punishment for roleplaying instead of rollplaying.

Of course I don't like the alignment system itself and do away with it when I can so take what I say with a grain or thirty of salt

[Alrik Vas]

notafraidtodie, i was reading your system and was like Conviction!! then i saw you based it off that and i had to stand up and salubri, er...salute.

Yeah, I feel alignment is pretty fluid depending on whether or not your mental fortitude is worth a damn.

[arouetta]

My own personal take - let the players take an alignment. Keep an eye on how they play. If they consistently act out of alignment, give them a warning. If they don't adhere a little more closely, tell them they've had an alignment change. Problem solved.

[KillWatch]

I don't know about anarchist but yes, most people aren't good. Many psychological tests have proven that. People aren't good. Those who would act principled are very rare. And that isn't VERY good that's just good. Makes me question your ethics.. I mean how good are you if you are only good until tested? and again there are opportunities for RP to play off guilt or shame for not doing what your moral self says you should have done.

Alignment has nothing to do with ME, or if it does then you have to add in IQ MA and PE
If you are saying your ME is what you are using to resist temptation then you also have to include IQ to see if they understand what the situation really is, MA tos ee if they are empathetic enough and PE if they are under enough physical pain.

Now you could tortures someone and make them do things against their alignment which would be a good test of alignment. If they chalk it up to I did what I had to do vs I am sorry I did it, I will spend the rest of life trying to make up for it. But good, a real hero will say I am willing to die for my beliefs, I will not harm anyone else to save my life.

on a related note I didn't feel aberrant was really evil. It had potential to be bad or selfish so I just put into selfish

[42dragon]

I posted some of this (the end thinking exercise) in a different forum (Palladium) but it probably applies here as well and might get some other point of views. But to this topic specifically.

Why do we need an alignment change system? What specifically happens if you change an alignment? Alignments give general guidelines on how a character should act in a given situation, which is determined and selected at character generation hopefully with a strong character concept in mind. Should the player just be allowed to change this concept during gameplay? I agree with the posts that the GM should probably advise the player that per the alignment their character probably wouldn't take these actions. Then a warning if it continues, and then a forced alignment change. But really what does that do, except allow the player to do anything with his character at any time regarless of alignment (because it can change).

When I GM'd, to try to keep my players in character I instituted a rule at which if you kept playing out of character first you didn't get the in-character xp bonus, but then if you had an alignment change all other xp gained from that point on was reduced by half, until you worked your way back to your character concept.

Or would it better perhaps to have the GM be able to step in and say, NO your character would not take that course of action based on alignment you chose come up with something different. Now this could really cause some strife at the table, so maybe not the best choice.

Perhaps something more OK, this action is going to be out of alignment for your character do you really want to do this (there may be a very solid in game reason to act out of character)? Keep in mind if you do take this course of action you will have to really role play out the alignment based consequesnces of these actions going forward. Guilt, hesitant to act in similar situations in the future, alcoholism (and penalties that go along with that) ect.. I think this would be ideal, but...

In my experience most GM's and even more players really don't and can't handle that level of really role playing (roll playing is more common) over a long running campaign. OK, I acted remorseful and sorry during the next session I am over it now, would be a normal (in my experience) sort of thing. And short campaigns or one shots are even worse becasue then the players really don't care if they are in alignment or not becasue in the end it won't matter.

Now to my somewhat related post. How do/would you handle alignments of other races?

One problem we have is we are viewing this from a human point of view.

Would you be considered an evil alignment for the whole sale slaughter of an entire colony? ............Before you answer.

What if that colony is a colony of ants, building a nest right outside your home and invading your kitchen? What if it is a colony of praire dogs that is bieng uprooted and killed to make room for your farm and crops? What if it is a colony of cows you are breeding and caring for until the time is right to slaughter them for food?

Your answer may be evil or not depending on your views, which is fine. You make take the approach that the examples above are not sentient life forms so it is not as big of a deal. Or you may still find it reprehensible. Or some of it not alignment affecting while others are. OK.

But look at this from another beings point of view. Say the war like Gromek who are said to have completely conquered their home world. All other creatures on their home world could be considered lesser beings to them. Perhaps even humans on that world are raised and breed for food. From a human point of view of course they are all evil. But to the average Gromek who would be the evil one, the Gromek raising humans as food for the populace and armies or the Gromek who is sabotaging operations and disrupting the food supply violently or not (i.e. terrorist)?

What about an even more extreme step in race like a Dragon. Most other species are significantly lesser beings to them. To most dragons humans are playthings. Something similar to a loved pet at best, or an invasive pest like ants to others. Applying human alignment (good, selfish, evil) to their actions only makes sense when looking at them from the outside human point of view. Would one dragon eating a dwarf because he looked and smelled tasty (i know a stretch) be cosidered evil to another dragon? Probably if that other dragon considered all lesser creatures as cherished pets, but not to another dragon (good alignment) who in his experience has always been persecuted by knights trying to slay him even though he has never eaten one and only killed in self defense but still considers lesser being pests.

Then there was other beings gods. Most gods are considered to be an aspect of some concept. For example we were discussing Rurga Goddess of War and Honor (Truth). To this god the aspect of truth is held above all others. Would these apsets that they represent/embody overide or supercede the stated alignment given by the writers? You can take the alignment but wouldn't you have to compare each of the guidelines to the point of view of the aspect not the point of view as a human?

Also would a stated good/principled alignment long lived being (dragon or god) who thinks/knows they can see the big picture. Be willing to kill an innocent small child while in disguise, which in turn will hurt the child and family and perhaps a community. But that act will lead to a small war with a neighboring kingdom that will cost 1000 lives over 2 months. But after that a new unified kindgom will spring up ushering in a 300 year time of peace and prosperity for the region. And the long lived being leaves the area forever, does not take credit, nor live and thrive in the new peaceful area. The act wasn't done for its own sake. ???

[Beatmeclever]

Fluid alignments are fluid morals. If you are a good alignment, violate your own moral center and suffer with regret until you find a way to live with yourself. If you are an evil alignment, violate your alignment and suffer with self-doubt until you re-affirm your evil convictions. I wasn't saying you picked the wrong alignment, I said you have to roleplay the consequences of the actions which violate your morals. Alignment is a roleplaying device. If you want characters the drift along the sliding scale, ignore the alignments altogether and just let them play without alignments. Then you don't have to worry about changing alignments.