Forums of the Megaverse®

Alright there is the normal ones, Principles, Scrupulous, Unprincipled, Anarchist, Miscreant, and Diabolist.

But everyone seems to forget about Taoist.

So if there is Taoist as an alignment, I think there should be alignments drawn up for other philosophies. Not religions, since having a christian outlook wouldnt work, though if you had a fanatical/by the bible alignment that would be more of a philosophy, do you see what I mean?

So what are all the different philosophies out there? I am looking for some help here, because I would like to submit a bunch of new alignments as a Rifter article.

No, Taoism is in Mystic China. Its already Cannon and whatnot.

verdilak wrote:No, Taoism is in Mystic China. Its already Cannon and whatnot.

It's not cannon, it's alignment.

I dislike the Taoist alignment. I used to play with a group that loved that alignment. They pretty much used it to justify acting however they liked at the time.

Half the points for the alignment start out with the word, "usually" which means you can do whatever the hell you want and still point at the alignment and say "but it's in my alignment" as justification to the GM.

That group had a lot bigger problems than the Taoist alignment though, I didn't stay with them long.

Misfit KotLD wrote:

lather wrote:

verdilak wrote:No, Taoism is in Mystic China. Its already Cannon and whatnot.

It's not cannon, it's alignment.

You mean it's a canon alignment?

Yes. Yes I do.

Thanks for the thread jack.

It's an ultra annoying typo.

Who cares about a typo? You all should be used to them after reading just one of PB's products. Sheesh.

I am used to them.

I still don't like them.

macksting wrote:So with the exception of my fondness for the Taoist alignment, folks generally agree with my post?

I never read this alignment.

I have no problems with your take on alignments.

I go by the alignments' descriptions more than the bullet points themselfs.

Indeed.

verdilak wrote:Who cares about a typo? You all should be used to them after reading just one of PB's products. Sheesh.

Natasha wrote:I go by the alignments' descriptions more than the bullet points themselfs.

Yes! That's what I like to do as well. I think I get a much better Scrupulous alignment that way, as well as all the others. The description is more like a commanders/mission intent, all the other stuff is just there as an example or support as far as I'm concerned.



On the topic of typos, and I really don't care about them, but for those few of you who do, since this board is set to British English, everyone remember OK is okay, and armor is spelled armour.

Alignment is merely a subset of personality.

If your PC has a personality, it has an alignment.

Jerell wrote:

Natasha wrote:I go by the alignments' descriptions more than the bullet points themselfs.

Yes! That's what I like to do as well. I think I get a much better Scrupulous alignment that way, as well as all the others. The description is more like a commanders/mission intent, all the other stuff is just there as an example or support as far as I'm concerned.

:ok:
Sounds good to me

C.R.A.F.T. wrote:

Natasha wrote:Alignment is merely a subset of personality.

If your PC has a personality, it has an alignment.

I agree with that completely.

I just don't like the idea of attaching an alignment (or set of alignments) to an occupation or being forced to abandon an alignment if you perform an action outside of its boundaries.

I understand your concern, certainly. I think it's a primarily a matter of playstyle and interpretation of the alignments and how they are supposed to work.

Are you speaking to someone in particuarly or in the plural "you", macksting?

I don't like always black and white good and evil, there are many shades of grey. Most people have at least some selfishness as well. Being true to the vision of a character I find is much more important than playing within a so-called alignment. It's far too rigid for my taste. I don't play alignment as a rigid code, so much as a rough guideline.

Of course they're rough guidelines.

Misfit KotLD wrote:Blame Drewkitty, he was the Typo-Demon.

"Did some one Summon me?"*in a deep voice*

Yes, there is a Taoist Alignment in the Mystic China book. While most of my chars are stated as Unprincipled, they act more Taoist, becasue they are honorable chars.

I so hoping you'd type "sumon" instead

You're using most pretty loosely man.

Most people I know would disagree with you.