PDA

View Full Version : (3.5) need help building and Alignment leveling system



Deca4531
2013-10-15, 08:41 AM
So alignment in 3.5 more or less can be ignored all together by the players. i want to make things more interesting in my game by rewarding people for good role playing and sticking to an alignment.

i only want to focus on good and evil for now, and what perks a player might gain with constant actions focused on said alignment. i was thinking of things like:

+5 to (diplomacy or intimidate)
1/d power (heal or inflict)
Aura (shedding light or darkness)
[at max level] gaining a template with no LA (like saint or its evil equivalent.)

im also wondering what might be a balances exp system for this. i was thinking of a kind of 0-100 system with a point based exp.

5 points for trying to take the right path (in the event the party ends up not)
10 points for defending/slaying someone even if it makes things harder for you (kinda vague i know, thats why i need help.)
20 points for self sacrifice/murder

i need some help improving on this, setting up more clearly defined action-to-rewards and things like that. any suggestion would be helpful

Note: im not looking to start a debate on what is evil and what is good. for the sake of this system ignore circumstance and intent for now.

Razanir
2013-10-15, 07:19 PM
So alignment in 3.5 more or less can be ignored all together by the players. i want to make things more interesting in my game by rewarding people for good role playing and sticking to an alignment.

:smallconfused: You've already lost me. Okay, sure, your alignment could change in some classes. But not for barbarians, bards, clerics, druids, monks or paladins. And that's just in Core. (6/11. Over 50%)

If players acting out of alignment is really an issue, then tell them up front that you will change their alignment if they don't follow the one they said they would. If you need help, find a numerical system like this (http://www.easydamus.com/alignmenttracking.html).

Deca4531
2013-10-17, 06:54 AM
:smallconfused: You've already lost me. Okay, sure, your alignment could change in some classes. But not for barbarians, bards, clerics, druids, monks or paladins. And that's just in Core. (6/11. Over 50%)

If players acting out of alignment is really an issue, then tell them up front that you will change their alignment if they don't follow the one they said they would. If you need help, find a numerical system like this (http://www.easydamus.com/alignmenttracking.html).

well if you had read further you would have seen i was speaking of good and evil, not law and chaos. out of all those classes only paladin has a good requirement (and really who plays paladins anyway). cleric has two class function that can change depending on alignment but they are minor.

Epsilon Rose
2013-10-17, 01:00 PM
I'd like to point out that this is probably a bad way to go about your goal, for the same reason that morality systems in games normally fail. Namely, it only rewards extremes. Allow me to give you a couple of (rather contrived) examples:


First, picture a paladin, coming home from a hard day of questing. As he enters the town, an old woman approaches him and asks for help clearing her cellar of giant rats. The rp response would be to refuse, citing his tiredness and the fact that his abilities could be better used elsewhere, possibly suggesting that she get some local kids to help. The 'good' answer is to acquiesce. Since your system rewards being good or evil, the player is likely to go along with it, rather than pick the more fun or in character choice. The evil side of the scale creates even more problems.

The second example is a bit more likely. Picture a nobel, namely the 4th daughter of a major house. She has decided to take up adventuring to gain Fame and Fortune, so she can support herself and avoid getting married off to the first politically favorable suitor. She is neither good nor evil and should not act like a paladin or Feind. Under your system, she can receive no benefits from proper role playing, while less deep, but more black and white, characters get points for making token gestures.


That said, I do like the idea of giving abilities for rp. I would suggest decoupling it from a binary morality system. Instead, maybe use a fate or archetype system, where players gain bonuses for acting in alignment with various occult forces. Also consider allowing mixed progressions and switching paths.

Razanir
2013-10-17, 11:13 PM
well if you had read further you would have seen i was speaking of good and evil, not law and chaos. out of all those classes only paladin has a good requirement (and really who plays paladins anyway). cleric has two class function that can change depending on alignment but they are minor.

Fair enough, although I'd think the ethical axis should be a valid point of discussion as well. And actually, paladins, clerics and druids ALL have moral-axis-based requirements. (Not to mention several PrCs)

bekeleven
2013-10-20, 01:15 AM
The second example is a bit more likely. Picture a nobel, namely the 4th daughter of a major house. She has decided to take up adventuring to gain Fame and Fortune, so she can support herself and avoid getting married off to the first politically favorable suitor. She is neither good nor evil and should not act like a paladin or Feind. Under your system, she can receive no benefits from proper role playing, while less deep, but more black and white, characters get points for making token gestures. Note how many spells and effects help people of good (or evil) alignment, and how many hurt those of non-good (or non-evil) alignment.

The game was built more or less from the ground up to encourage the black-and-white roleplayers, starting with its laws of physics. I agree that it's an issue, but most that want to solve it do so by eliminating alignments or severely limiting their effects on the world.

This proposed "alignment levelling system" is just a strengthening of the mechanics already within the game.

Feedback for the system: Although I am generally against forcing good players to be diplomancers and evil players to be intimidators, or whatever, such a system can work and be thematic depending on the tone of the campaign. However, I would take a lot of care with the point-values approach. I think an ad-hoc system, with the DM giving the rewards, would work better and be a bit harder to game.

Epsilon Rose
2013-10-20, 02:10 AM
Note how many spells and effects help people of good (or evil) alignment, and how many hurt those of non-good (or non-evil) alignment.

The game was built more or less from the ground up to encourage the black-and-white roleplayers, starting with its laws of physics. I agree that it's an issue, but most that want to solve it do so by eliminating alignments or severely limiting their effects on the world.

This proposed "alignment levelling system" is just a strengthening of the mechanics already within the game.


I certainly agree with you on that front, but that doesn't mean you should exacerbate the problems that WoTC caused. I mean, they thought the wizard was balanced and the monk was powerful and we don't encourage people to homebrew around those axioms. I understand the desire to fix the morality system, rather than simply nuking it from orbit, but you have to keep your goals in mind. Deca said he wants the alignments to matter and to encourage good role-playing. It is my, decently supported, position that simply strengthening the current system would be counter to his goal, while modifying the metrics could make it relevant and an encouragement to actually playing your character.

LordChaos13
2013-10-20, 04:16 AM
So alignment in 3.5 more or less can be ignored all together by the players. i want to make things more interesting in my game by rewarding people for good role playing and sticking to an alignment.

Not without Houseruling
Barbarians
Bards
Clerics
Druids
All have alignment restrictions and more.Some are more lenient than others but they are still THERE.


I only want to focus on good and evil for now, and what perks a player might gain with constant actions focused on said alignment. i was thinking of things like:

This is bad. There is too much of a focus on Good vs Evil. LAW VS CHAOS IS A TOTALLY VALID AND DEEP COMBAT! LOOK AT THE BLOOD WAR! /endraeg




+5 to (diplomacy or intimidate)
1/d power (heal or inflict)
Aura (shedding light or darkness)
[at max level] gaining a template with no LA (like saint or its evil equivalent.)

This is bad. First Good =/= Nice also the bonus applies against Evil characters too so a Good character is better at corruption (or redemption depending on your POV) via diplomancy than Evil
1/D What? Iz Confused
Aura like a Cleric? This also does nothing, so why would people want it?
Gaining templates if fine


Im also wondering what might be a balances exp system for this. i was thinking of a kind of 0-100 system with a point based exp.
This is good. Good idea. needs work


5 points for trying to take the right path (in the event the party ends up not)
10 points for defending/slaying someone even if it makes things harder for you (kinda vague i know, thats why i need help.)
20 points for self sacrifice/murder
This is bad.
1. Points can be racked up easily WAY too easy. 5 points/arguement on decision can mean 50 points for a good roleplayer or indecisive group, more if both
2. Making things harder? You realize this promotes Detect Evil/Death right? Or rampant CE Slaughter because the first X kills of random townsfolk are of the make things harder right? After a certain point say when the gaurds are called its no longer making things harder but by that point youd have a couple hundred kills
3. Define self-sacrifice? I dont want to lose a level for 20 points of Good. Also Murder on the Evil side means EVERY kill. That town you attacked would instaEvil. That horde of Orcs you defend against? Turn your shiny paragon into a horned goatee-wearing Vizer
4. You realize your points are odd right? SImply /5. 1 point for following the path, 2 for killing, 4 for murder is the SAME as 5/10/20



Note: im not looking to start a debate on what is evil and what is good. for the sake of this system ignore circumstance and intent for now.

While laudable it DOES need deciding. Though it is easy if you take the Cosmic Law sense that Good and Evil are NOT the good and evil of humanity, but the actions lain down by unfathomable Old Ones at Creation.
Simply add the disclaimer, throw in some small caveats and sprinkle with warnings. oh and drink down a heat resistance potion :smalltongue:


Refined idea:
Every action has a set XP gain for their type. Up too a certain amount of XP cn be gained per week and ignored if wanted (so an Evil character could grab 3 Good XP and at the end of the week ignore it
at 100 Good XP gain a Good level then reset the counter. At 100 MORE Good XP gain Good2
PCs may have a number of Levels = to their HD
They can only have 1 of their Opposing alignment (eg 6Evil, 1Good)
After that any further levels flips 1 of the Original levels into a Redeem[Align] level (Example: 5Evil, 1Good, 1RedeemEvil) which gives some bonuses
When another Original Alignment is gained flip a Redeemed BACK to the original (example: 6Evil, 1Good) OR gain another of the original alignment (7Evil, 1Good)
If all Original alignment are Redeemed except 1 and another level is gained turn a Redeemed level into the Opposing Alignment (1 Evil, 2Good, 4RedeemedEvil)
The spark of the original will always be there, waiting. It may never be gotten rid of.


Effects of Levels:
Law:
At first level gain either +1 Attack & Damage against Chaotic aligned OR +1 AC against them
At 2nd level gain DR1/- only applicable to Chaotic-Aligned people
At 3rd... Bored now, probably head into actual thematic abilities tied to Law at this point

Evil: See Law but for Good

Good: You know what I'm going to say...

RedeemedLaw: Turning your back from order is hard, patterns and repetition is soo easy to fall back into. To prevent this you being to focus on chaos, letting your mind wander and become slippery (+2 to saves against Mind-Affecting)
2. Blah tired

Redeemed Evil: Other people, they have feelings. They deserve things too...They can be used and have goals and are You but with a different look and mindset. (+1 Diplomacy)

Redeemed Good: The others, they arent like you...They dont appreciate you or even are your equals. No you are BETTER than they are, and they know it. They want to force you down, use you. but this time, you use them right back! (+1 Bluff)

Redeemed Chaos: Everything under the chaos...It follows rules. The wind flows because of laws...Like clockwork just more intricate and eternal than anything you can fathom. Patterns you can watch and get lost in, eternally ponder the meaning behind it all (+2 to saves against Mind-Affecting)

Deca4531
2013-10-20, 06:36 PM
Refined idea:
Every action has a set XP gain for their type. Up too a certain amount of XP cn be gained per week and ignored if wanted (so an Evil character could grab 3 Good XP and at the end of the week ignore it
at 100 Good XP gain a Good level then reset the counter. At 100 MORE Good XP gain Good2
PCs may have a number of Levels = to their HD
They can only have 1 of their Opposing alignment (eg 6Evil, 1Good)
After that any further levels flips 1 of the Original levels into a Redeem[Align] level (Example: 5Evil, 1Good, 1RedeemEvil) which gives some bonuses
When another Original Alignment is gained flip a Redeemed BACK to the original (example: 6Evil, 1Good) OR gain another of the original alignment (7Evil, 1Good)
If all Original alignment are Redeemed except 1 and another level is gained turn a Redeemed level into the Opposing Alignment (1 Evil, 2Good, 4RedeemedEvil)
The spark of the original will always be there, waiting. It may never be gotten rid of.


Effects of Levels:
Law:
At first level gain either +1 Attack & Damage against Chaotic aligned OR +1 AC against them
At 2nd level gain DR1/- only applicable to Chaotic-Aligned people
At 3rd... Bored now, probably head into actual thematic abilities tied to Law at this point

Evil: See Law but for Good

Good: You know what I'm going to say...

RedeemedLaw: Turning your back from order is hard, patterns and repetition is soo easy to fall back into. To prevent this you being to focus on chaos, letting your mind wander and become slippery (+2 to saves against Mind-Affecting)
2. Blah tired

Redeemed Evil: Other people, they have feelings. They deserve things too...They can be used and have goals and are You but with a different look and mindset. (+1 Diplomacy)

Redeemed Good: The others, they arent like you...They dont appreciate you or even are your equals. No you are BETTER than they are, and they know it. They want to force you down, use you. but this time, you use them right back! (+1 Bluff)

Redeemed Chaos: Everything under the chaos...It follows rules. The wind flows because of laws...Like clockwork just more intricate and eternal than anything you can fathom. Patterns you can watch and get lost in, eternally ponder the meaning behind it all (+2 to saves against Mind-Affecting)

well ty you for your input. i wanted to avoid law and chaos only because i dont want that many trackers going on at once, pluse what constitutes chaos is hard to define.

i agree there should be a cap, so an evil character cant go into the first town they find and kill everyone. however i dont think they should be able to ignore points, which is harder on good characters than evil but i also think the rewards should be a bit better for being good anyway (as it is harder to maintain and more costly.)

i'll have to give more thought on the redeeming thing. personaly i was thinking of letting a character use the Penitence spell to reset their lv to 0

LordChaos13
2013-10-20, 11:54 PM
well ty you for your input. i wanted to avoid law and chaos only because i dont want that many trackers going on at once, pluse what constitutes chaos is hard to define.

i agree there should be a cap, so an evil character cant go into the first town they find and kill everyone. however i dont think they should be able to ignore points, which is harder on good characters than evil but i also think the rewards should be a bit better for being good anyway (as it is harder to maintain and more costly.)

i'll have to give more thought on the redeeming thing. personaly i was thinking of letting a character use the Penitence spell to reset their lv to 0

How is Good harder to maintain than Evil? Both are cosmic definitions with embodiments of Purity
Sure ooc it might be, but in-game both are entirely valid lifepaths
Also, its easier to be Selfish than Selfless
The ignoring points /week is because everyone has their hypocrisies. Pillaging Warlord, Brutal Warrior, Selfish Hoarder of jewels, Loving Father.

Deca4531
2013-10-21, 12:02 PM
How is Good harder to maintain than Evil? Both are cosmic definitions with embodiments of Purity
Sure ooc it might be, but in-game both are entirely valid lifepaths
Also, its easier to be Selfish than Selfless
The ignoring points /week is because everyone has their hypocrisies. Pillaging Warlord, Brutal Warrior, Selfish Hoarder of jewels, Loving Father.

i only say Good is harder because evil can choose not to do evil in most cases. they can look at a helpless rich guy on the side of the road and say to themselves "i dont feel like robbing and kill that person today." where as a good character would have issues with, say, walking past an injured child on the side of the road calling for help. sure they could, but it would be harder to explain why in character.

and yes i can see how your example of a evil man and loving father would work, but how well dose it work on the opposite spectrum? generous man, saint, selfless healer, wife beater?

LordChaos13
2013-10-21, 12:06 PM
Wife beater =/= loving father
Wow I never thought Id type that


A more apt comparison would be pointing to general Vices. Selfless healer, consummate gambler? Deadbeat dad?

Deca4531
2013-10-21, 08:10 PM
Wife beater =/= loving father
Wow I never thought Id type that


A more apt comparison would be pointing to general Vices. Selfless healer, consummate gambler? Deadbeat dad?

lol, wow, that should be in a your signature.

but i do agree that allowing leaneancy for one alignment and not another would be unbalanced.

LordChaos13
2013-10-21, 11:06 PM
Your wish, my command :smallbiggrin: