[QUOTE=elowin;48604651]uhh
Neutral isn't about maintaining balance.
I mean, it can be, but it isn't like 99% of the time.
It literally just means you aren't significantly good, evil, chaotic or lawful.[/QUOTE]
should have thought about that better, my mistake
it is true though that several neutral characters do feel that good and evil at their extremes, ditto for lawful or chaotic, can be prejudicial or outright a dangerous idea as it promotes imbalance.
[QUOTE=SiberysTranq;48602420]that feeling when you make a suggestion as a joke while GMing
and the whole party suddenly decides it's a genius plan
I feel like I have made a grave mistake[/QUOTE]
I made a dumb joke and my entire Black Crusade party killed themselves in an Ambush. The BBEG sent out thousands of letters decrying their wicked ways. They counter-responded, going for a "Liberating the masses, hero of the people" type thing. His response basically amounted to "Come outside the city to this graveyard and we'll settle this like men". Every NPC said "It's a trap", the players said "It's a trap, but we'll take a squad of men with us to even the odds".
It was a trap.
[QUOTE=Zonesylvania;48604714]should have thought about that better, my mistake
it is true though that several neutral characters do feel that good and evil at their extremes, ditto for lawful or chaotic, can be prejudicial or outright a dangerous idea as it promotes imbalance.[/QUOTE]
Yes, that's true.
It's what druids are all about, after all.
Besides druids though, that outlook is extremely rare.
This is the only good alignment chart
[t]http://i.imgur.com/H1IxKrT.jpg[/t]
[QUOTE=cyclocius;48604835]I made a dumb joke and my entire Black Crusade party killed themselves in an Ambush. The BBEG sent out thousands of letters decrying their wicked ways. They counter-responded, going for a "Liberating the masses, hero of the people" type thing. His response basically amounted to "Come outside the city to this graveyard and we'll settle this like men". Every NPC said "It's a trap", the players said "It's a trap, but we'll take a squad of men with us to even the odds".
It was a trap.[/QUOTE]
Only because Old Man Luminus wasn't there to warn those dumb young initiates of Chaos
He would've suggested strafing runs. Several, in fact.
[QUOTE=xeo xeo;48602158]I don't pay much mind to the alignment system, it's silly to gear your playstyle towards the arbitrary "how good am I" that you decided upon when rolling your character. In my opinion, one should always play 3-5 sessions before even deciding upon an alignment, to get a feel for your character and how he or she behaves, After deciding upon alignment, have [I]it [/I]change dynamically depending on your characters actions, not the opposite
Except with paladins and clerics I guess, but being granted divine power based upon their actions is a central theme around their clasess, and opens role play options[/QUOTE]
Alignment isn't supposed to ever limit your character's actions except in the case of monks and paladins. it's simply meant to reflect your character's actions and outlook. Choosing an alignment on character creation simply serves the purpose of communicating the way you intend to play your character.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;48606000]Alignment isn't supposed to ever limit your character's actions except in the case of monks and paladins. it's simply meant to reflect your character's actions and outlook. Choosing an alignment on character creation simply serves the purpose of communicating the way you intend to play your character.[/QUOTE]
*and clerics, and druids
Pretty much their only purpose is for effects that only affect certain alignments.
[QUOTE=elowin;48606823]*and clerics, and druids
Pretty much their only purpose is for effects that only affect certain alignments.[/QUOTE]
doesnt that depend on your DM either way? if your DM is one to take note of your PC's actions vs their alignment, he would start handing out warnings (particularly if they happen to be clerics, druids, or paladins but it can happen for other classes and in other ways.) and if they really screw up, like killing noncombatants, particularly children, that's a forced alignment change and/or inability to advance which might only be dealt by seeking atonement.
Of course, like I mentioned this is all dependent on your DM, but those DMs who prefer that alignments be played in character will do this more often.
[QUOTE=elowin;48606823]*and clerics, and druids
Pretty much their only purpose is for effects that only affect certain alignments.[/QUOTE]
Though even in those cases, like Zone said, a good dm should just be warning the players if the actions they're taking go against their alignment rather than actually limiting them.
[QUOTE=Alice3173;48606947]Though even in those cases, like Zone said, a good dm should just be warning the players if the actions they're taking go against their alignment rather than actually limiting them.[/QUOTE]
well duh
[QUOTE=Alice3173;48606947]Though even in those cases, like Zone said, a good dm should just be warning the players if the actions they're taking go against their alignment rather than actually limiting them.[/QUOTE]
Well yeah, it's a limitation on the character, not something where the GM says "You can't do that".
[QUOTE=SiberysTranq;48602420]that feeling when you make a suggestion as a joke while GMing
and the whole party suddenly decides it's a genius plan
I feel like I have made a grave mistake[/QUOTE]
I did the opposite as a GM, some player was messing around and made a joke that he jumps into the well. I asked if he really wanted to and thinking I was joking too said yeah. He ended having to make a reflex save to land safely at the bottom of the dry well that acted as the entrance to an age old necropolis I'd setup the night before in case anyone tried it.
E:
Then had to fight off a few skeletons while the party members finally decided they should check on him, only to find him with about 3 HP left around a pile of bones.
[editline]3rd September 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Alice3173;48606947]Though even in those cases, like Zone said, a [B]good dm[/B] should just be warning the players if the actions they're taking go against their alignment rather than actually limiting them.[/QUOTE]
What about CE DM's?
I hate when you're looking for books for things to build your character with and then you see another race that looks like it'd be tons of fun to play, like a doppleganger
[QUOTE=SiberysTranq;48603344]So running my shadowrun game. Set in Vietnam because I'm a massive weeb and I love to do shit in that region of the world. Party just got back from a night of killing triad gangsters, stealing drugs, and murdering a bunch of metahuman rights activists, then torturing and filming the execution of their leader while doing a wetwork job for the IJN.
So after a day of everyone lying around spending their blood money, the street sammy gets a call from his smuggler contact. The skinny of it is they need to destroy a vietnamese AWACS airplane that has (unintentionally) been leading to a ton of his shipments getting intercepted and generally being bad for business. Said airplane, it turns out, has to make it's main port of call at the airport just north of the city.
So, party is discussing plans, trying to figure out how to get into this secured hangar bay after the plane lands so they can blow it up with a few kilos of C-12. After stuff like impersonating the pilots, to the mages transforming into rats to sneak in, etc etc etc. I made a joke about how 'or you can go pretend to be firefighters, that'd work'
Guess what the party's plan to get into the hangar is now.[/QUOTE]
you say it like impersonating the firefighters and me and bjork becoming rats are two different plans
[editline]3rd September 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=ElusiveBadger;48607148]I hate when you're looking for books for things to build your character with and then you see another race that looks like it'd be tons of fun to play, like a doppleganger[/QUOTE]
then you realize it's actually stupid and regret everything
[QUOTE=No Party Hats;48607205]me and bjork becoming rats[/QUOTE]
I mean you're already mages so there's not far left to go after that, is there?
:v:
Also make sure you scout the fuck out of the place in the astral before you go in, just to be safe.
(And have the decker/technomancer disable any defenses they can over wireless, whether they turn 'em off or take control of them.)
[QUOTE=Rents;48607120]Well yeah, it's a limitation on the character, not something where the GM says "You can't do that".[/QUOTE]
You might be surprised to see how often the dm fails to make that distinction. I've actually had it happen in most of the campaigns I've played in.
In 2e you got a huge XP penalty if you changed alignment, I believe. But I don't think there's anything like that in more recent editions.
[QUOTE=Glent;48607983]In 2e you got a huge XP penalty if you changed alignment, I believe. But I don't think there's anything like that in more recent editions.[/QUOTE]
Paladins would fall if they weren't lawful good. Pretty sure that was it. Clerics might lose their powers if they weren't within the acceptable alignments for their god, and maybe druids if they didn't maintain one of their alignments as neutral. I think that was it.. maybe monks in a non-lawful alignment but I'm not sure.
alignments are awful anyway
I don't like the class restrictions on alignment at all. It's terrible shit.
Like what If I wanted to be a monk who had bard skills. Or a drunken monk or some other antithesis to a strict monkly monk. Like a monk at the temple of chaos. Who is strictly lawfully chaotic. Yep.
Or a paladin who didn't serve good, but lawfulness. Or a space druid from a land where neutral is the most extreme of abnormality among nature.
It doesn't even make sense for the barbarian. Barbarians have laws, even if they're barbaric ones.
[QUOTE=The Jack;48608038]I don't like the class restrictions on alignment at all. It's terrible shit.
Like what If I wanted to be a monk who had bard skills. Or a drunken monk or some other antithesis to a strict monkly monk. Like a monk at the temple of chaos. Who is strictly lawfully chaotic. Yep.
Or a paladin who didn't serve good, but lawfulness. Or a space druid from a land where neutral is the most extreme of abnormality among nature.
It doesn't even make sense for the barbarian. Barbarians have laws, even if they're barbaric ones.[/QUOTE]
Then play a game that lets you do that. Classic paladins were a VERY SPECIFIC thing. They were lawful good champions of justice, goodness, and holiness. Classic barbarians were marauding raiders. Classic monks were all shaolin monks and rigidly disciplined.
You can complain about it, but that's just how the classes WERE back then, it made sense.
[QUOTE=The Jack;48608038]Like what If I wanted to be a monk who had bard skills. Or a drunken monk or some other antithesis to a strict monkly monk. Like a monk at the temple of chaos. Who is strictly lawfully chaotic. Yep.[/quote]
A monk with bard skills has nothing to do with alignment. A drunken brawler monk is still a monk, that doesn't mean they're unlawful. Monks are all about maintaining balance and inner peace, which is a pretty Lawful thing; not law of the land or the people, no, but law of a sort. It's a code of conduct type thing, which is part of what Lawful is meant to represent.
[quote]Or a paladin who didn't serve good, but lawfulness. Or a space druid from a land where neutral is the most extreme of abnormality among nature.[/quote]
IIRC 5e Paladins don't have to be Lawful Good, just some sort of Lawful; granted, that's done to make room for LE Anti-Paladins, and shit, but it's still possible to go LN and be about the spirit of Law more than anything.
[quote]It doesn't even make sense for the barbarian. Barbarians have laws, even if they're barbaric ones.[/QUOTE]
Barbarians being chaotic is less a way of saying they don't have laws, and more about them being all about personal freedom and doing whatever they want. Lawful doesn't mean 'you have laws', it means 'you adhere closely to a set of laws or codes', whether they're specific to yourself, a group you're part of, or the land in general.
[QUOTE=Chronische;48607995]Paladins would fall if they weren't lawful good. Pretty sure that was it. Clerics might lose their powers if they weren't within the acceptable alignments for their god, and maybe druids if they didn't maintain one of their alignments as neutral. I think that was it.. maybe monks in a non-lawful alignment but I'm not sure.[/QUOTE]
rangers could also fall if they violated their credo or did a bad boo-boo in the eyes of whichever deity they served
LN paladin sounds like Judge Dredd with a sword,
[QUOTE=Rents;48608209]LN paladin sounds like Judge Dredd with a sword,[/QUOTE]
Totally legit if you wanted to play a Vengeance paladin. That's pretty much exactly what they are.
if everyone just played wizards there would be no issue at all
[QUOTE=elowin;48608480]if everyone just played wizards there would be no issue at all[/QUOTE]
Divination school sucks.
Anyone know a good system for post-war 1920s deiselpunk anarchy waging faction wars across a city?
[QUOTE=Aldawolf;48608679]Anyone know a good system for post-war 1920s deiselpunk anarchy waging faction wars across a city?[/QUOTE]
gurps
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
