tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8302487761596456689.post1452155247816857382..comments2024-03-27T11:04:31.390-04:00Comments on From the Sorcerer's Skull: The Meaning of Good & Evil (Alignments)Treyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04647628467658839351noreply@blogger.comBlogger4125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8302487761596456689.post-19268397889288017312017-11-27T06:07:35.155-05:002017-11-27T06:07:35.155-05:00I like this take. I've been running OD&D/c...I like this take. I've been running OD&D/clones when I run things lately, so I've been using just L/N/C. But one thing I've stressed (I actually just incorporated it into my house rule sheet as a clarification) is that in my setting L/C have absolutely nothing to do with G/E, and that alignments are not codes of behavior (in a traditional sense): "any behavior that furthers the cause (of cosmic law/chaos) is acceptable." So if being kind and virtuous furthers the cause of chaos somehow, that's great. If burning an orc village furthers the cause of law somehow, that's okay too (maybe not from a moral standpoint necessarily, but from an alignment one).Chris C.https://www.blogger.com/profile/08655640273250716377noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8302487761596456689.post-27339360438039698212017-11-26T17:27:51.284-05:002017-11-26T17:27:51.284-05:00I don't really see much difference necessarily...I don't really see much difference necessarily with the Anderson approach and the Moorcockian one, except the parameters of the story they're in. And the fact that humans in Anderson don't get to choose their alignment. Treyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04647628467658839351noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8302487761596456689.post-64543579673534674582017-11-26T17:10:55.475-05:002017-11-26T17:10:55.475-05:00Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of alignment...Broadly speaking, there are two kinds of alignment systems: Cosmic Forces™ and Clash of Civilizations™.<br /><br />Alignment in AD&D takes after Moorcock's Elric: alignment is cosmic, only the gods and other mighty supernatural entities are truly of Law or of Chaos, and mortals pick a side in order to survive a conflict they can't really grasp.<br /><br />Alignment in D&D or Chainmail is more like the clash of civilizations, which you see in Tolkien (Free Peoples vs. Shadow/Enemy) or Star Wars (light side vs. dark side), but the better example in a gaming context would be Anderson's Three Hearts and Three Lions, where Law is the realm of men and civilization and Chaos is old world of magic and monsters and fairies.<br /><br />I prefer the latter, to the point where in my games I totally divest alignment from morality or behavior or even player choice and just make it a quality inherent in different beings: humans without magic are Lawful, demi-humans and magic-users are Neutral, and most monsters are Chaotic, just by definition, and that's all there is to it. Makes things nice and simple.John Higginshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/06522143715905888511noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-8302487761596456689.post-11914856097460635212017-11-26T14:27:56.156-05:002017-11-26T14:27:56.156-05:00That is a reasonable approach. I coul
Personally,...That is a reasonable approach. I coul<br /><br />Personally, I use method of just having Lawful, Chaotic, and Neutral. I use the definition of alignment meaning an alliance or agreement. Mortals only Lawful or Chaotic alignments by active means, such as making a pact. Mot other people, whether they are a cold-blooded murder or a charitable healer, are just neutral.<br /><br />Spells that detect alignment or magic items that depend on them work based on the relationship the individual has with otherworldy forces. <br /><br />One advantage is that you can easily add or remove factions from this alignment system. It isn't attempting to be some kind of personality test. It's just a list of the cosmic forces that exist in your setting that players can engage with. Adam Baulderstonehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/08247875453290704056noreply@blogger.com