Shifts are Inspiring

[ancientempathy]

I searched in the forums some but I couldn't find a topic. Maybe I passed over it, or didn’t search deep enough, but here goes;

This is about Alignment shifts, and role playing them.

1.) How do you make your character handle an alignment shift?
2.) Do you even like your alignment shifted?

I'll answer question 2 before 1: Yes, I love my alignment being shifted. Most especially for my paladin, Randal. It's happened several times before, and it adds to great RP. Also, he's the easiest one to use as an example.

How do I make him handle the alignment shift? Or any character?

Let's pick a shift from Lawful towards Chaos to discuss. Apply the below info towards an Evil to Good/Good to Evil/Lawful to Chaos shift in similar light and fashion too. Neutrality can be factored into this all as well.

I've once been docked 10 points of Law from the Paladin. That was a BIG ouch both OOCly and ICly, but I looked at it as a good challenge. What ended up happening is, I gave him fighter levels, and made him have more of that "brawler mindframe" on his person. I'm sure some friends of Randal can attest to witnessing this side of his too.

His mannerisms were more chaotic on certain things and certain situations, and they still are occasionally, despite being back to normal a bit above. But did I only did that? No.

The more chaotic nature aside, I also made him reflect on his actions more, and made him question what it means to be "Law". Of course he didn't sit down or go up to anyone and say..."Let me talk to you about Law". It's not meant in a literal sense, in other words lol. He reflected on what he did in the inside, and went about fixing it accordingly with time. Once he did, I started to make him take Paladin levels once again.

I think alignment shifts should be taken in two ways, as mentioned above. 1st) RP an effect from the shift somehow. 2nd) look for a way to strive towards regaining the lost points if you want. There's a character I had that kept gaining so many Chaotic points that he just reveled in Chaos a lot hence forth, therefore not bothering to consider anything lawful and even becoming zealous in a manner.

What have you all to say though? =)

Please be mindful of this threads title. This isn't to talk about how to ACT a certain alignment! This is how to handle a SHIFT!



P.S. Your character's deity and the deity's dogma also plays a key role in their alignment. If a particular shift is done, then consider what the deity may think too, or how they'd feel. A shift towards evil in my paladin of Torm; "diminishes" Torm in my opinion. Every good adds to his luster. =)

[Grozer]

In my opinion the question is backwards. Alignment shifts are a result of your character's actions which means he has already ACTED in that manner. Alignment shifts are a consequence and should your character continue to follow similar actions or decisions their alignment would eventually more properly reflect the character.

In a long winded response to your question, my character wouldnt react to the alignment shift since he already acted to receive the shift. I wouldnt RP regaining the lost points since the points are meaningless to the character. Why would he try to regain the points or the alignment for that matter, what if the character is now motivated by some tramatic event in his life that has dramatically changed his outlook?

My personal feeling is too much is made of playing the alignment and not the character. Now dont get me wrong, if you start character A as LG, I would expect the character background story to include aspects that lead to that path and I would expect the character to behave in a LG manner. However if this same character decides well it seems like an ok idea to band up to make a deal with a devil.... eh well... that isnt so LG and his alignment should be shifted accordingly.

As to the deity and dogma, well this is more meaningful to me. Those are motivating factors.... not just a label like alignment. Generally speaking the alignment of a deity summarizes their dogma. For example Bane represents discipline, tyranny, order, complete control which clearly mean LE.

[ancientempathy]

Well said Grozer. I couldnt agree more with the 'sticking to character' than the alignment thing. Sometimes it's a bit tricky though, and certain classes does make it hard. I think it would be safe to say: sticking strictly to alignment, makes for zealoutry, possibly?

I meant for my statement to also incorporate 'how one acted' too. I R just not smart and old enough yet to word things correctly (or maybe it has something to do with english being my second language lol)

And if its on the level of trama and big drama, then that's a more significant factor I would think. I should have touched on that seperatly, for when I was typing, I had small shifts in mind, not big ones that could lead to trama (I cant see a 1 point towards evil or good being that dramatic). Pretty sure I also had the mindframe of a paladin while typing that out xD

I see attonment in order if a paladin does evil. Would he not feel the need to attone for his actions? It would be sticking to the character. In retrospect, you'd be sticking to the alignment/deities dogma (Torm in his case) in light of it all too, I would think

[starofthewest]

Alignment shifts don't lead to anything. They are consequences of events, actions, and statements that have *already* occured.

What I just said was, in two sentences, what Grozer has already expanded on above. Deviations from the alignment you've selected should be in the course of your rp, whether as a result of internal or external factors, ie another character influencing your own, or a revelation they've come to through insights or circumstances, whatever.

Alignment changes (non scripted) would be rewarded accordingly. The actual change of alignment in terms of points is an OOC event designed to *reflect something that has already happened*.

To discuss, as this thread seems to, appropriate ways to "react to" an alignment shift, is completely inappropriate.

By the same token, scripted shifts are designed to reflect the consequences of your actions. Whether it be immediate or as part of a quest reward. Killing the deva is evil, you are rewarded evil points. Saving the elves and not asking for reward is good, you are rewarded good points. Stealing is chaotic, you get chaotic points.

[ancientempathy]

Alignment shifts (the numbers) are symbolic and reflect the actions? It's just there to measure?

I would say any paladin acting evil or chaotic enough will be leading to something. Fallening.

And I can't see a good character not wanting to attone for something. If they do something bad/evil, wouldn't they 'feel bad'? Wouldn't they want to try and make up for it?

It would be best to stick to the *character* too, not the *alignment*. It's through development that makes a character, as Grozer and I discussed at one point, not the alignment itself. It's why I'm asking if 'alignment shifts' is just a way of measure...kind of like a warning flare?

[EDM Neo]

Just as far as paladins falling goes... technically, a -single- willing evil act, regardless of circumstance or intent, is supposed to be enough to make a paladin fall until subjected to an Atonement spell (www.d20srd.org/srd/spells/atonement.htm):

Code of Conduct
A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin’s code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

Associates
While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

Ex-Paladins
A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who grossly violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and abilities (including the service of the paladin’s mount, but not weapon, armor, and shield proficiencies). She may not progress any farther in levels as a paladin. She regains her abilities and advancement potential if she atones for her violations (see the atonement spell description), as appropriate.

Like a member of any other class, a paladin may be a multiclass character, but multiclass paladins face a special restriction. A paladin who gains a level in any class other than paladin may never again raise her paladin level, though she retains all her paladin abilities.

From www.d20srd.org/srd/classes/paladin.htm

Of course, how strictly the above is followed is up to the DMs.

As far as everyone else goes, I pretty much agree with Grozer and StaroftheWest. Your character may ICly feel the need to atone for doing anything they consider wrong, but it shouldn't be a result of the alignment shift, rather as a result of the actual act.

[ancientempathy]

Smoothly said Celith, and that's what I was aiming/wanting to hear. The paladin information is interesting too.

Wonder how good rangers comitting evil actions would react and look at things during their life? Or even monks doing unlawful deeds? Never really RPed either, so any feedback from our Monk and Ranger players would be cool hehe

[starofthewest]

ancientempathy said:

I would say any paladin acting evil or chaotic enough will be leading to something. Fallening.

Dude, you are missing my point. Neoseanster is exactly right, it isn't a progress of events thing, it is an instant thing which the bioware engine uses alignment point increment shifts to reflect after the fact. Alignment shifts are results of actions, not motivations for actions or to make your character behave differently. If your paladin, to use your above example was "docked" 10 lawful points, then it was because the DM who did so believed that your character had acted or was consistently acting in a more chaotic way than your present LG alignment indicated. Failure to follow a lawful order from your superior, theft, or breaking a vow might lead to this, I don't know the situation. If you are of the opinion that your character's actions didn't justify the alignment shift, PM a DM about it and ask why they did so, so you can understand it (though your character might not realize the path they are on IG).

Atonement and other such things are reactions to events, not alignment shift. A good character who chooses to commit an evil act through the course of events will likely realize they have crossed a line, and do what they can to "make it right". Or maybe they come up with a justification for the evil act, or cannot come to terms with it because of their anger or grief or whatever, and that is where the concept of "falling" with regards to paladins comes in.

ancientempathy said:

It would be best to stick to the *character* too, not the *alignment*.

I have a problem with the fact that you make it sound as though these two things are antithetical. Your characters alignment is who they are. Their personality, and their past, and their faith, and all those other factors combine to make them a particular alignment, for a variety of specific reasons. *that* is what Grozer was trying to say, though he can rebuke me if I'm reading his response incorrectly, not that there is character, and then there is alignment.

Alignment reflects a character's viewpoint, values, and philosophy, and, however nuanced your characters specific place within both the Law/Chaos axis and the Good/Evil axis, that is exactly what alignment represents... two specific places on two lines. Yes, this is a simplification, especially when you consider today's prevailing view of subjectivity when it comes to good and evil, but it's just the way the game works. Your *character* and your *alignment* are in no way two seperate entities, *alignment* represents the fundamental core of who your *character* is and what they believe in.

Actions and rp with other characters will almost inevitably at one point or another lead to changes or shifts. For example, my character Isabelle, who is LE, went through a series of both internal and external experiences where, for a time, she genuinely (however tentatively) made efforts to walk the path of good. Through rp with other characters and being particularly influenced by Abby Winters (played by lilshabba) Isabelle actually gained I think 10 or so good points, but in the end it wasn't a committed enough shift/life change to affect her overall alignment, and without spoilers, you can find out what happened next IG maybe.

This is the other thing that bothers me about the examples you are using - it is by far easier for a Lawful or Good character to commit chaotic or evil acts than for a chaotic or evil character to commit lawful or good acts. This is how it should be, because Lawful and Good alignments demand harsher strictures or limitations of those who subscribe to them. For a paladin, it's damn hard to walk that line consistently, and it is very very realistic that your PC will find it hard to maintain those standards all the time. So yes, it is harder to consistently roleplay some alignments than others, but that is totally consistent with the realism of the setting. Temptations abound, as they say.

[moulinous]

"Decide how your character acts, what she/he likes, what their wants out of life is, what scares them, and what makes them angry. Race and alignment are good places to start when thinking about your character's personailty, but they are bad places to stop...Your character's personailty can change over time. Just because you decide some basic facts about your character's personality when you create the character does not mean you need to abide by those facts as if they were holy writ. Let your character evolve and grow the way real people do..."

Taken from the Player's Handbook pg 94. In short, play your character and do not worry about your alignment as much and you will be fine. Be true to your character and as I saw someone else with a great saying say...Role Play not Roll Play. Sometimes paladins fall and monks make mistakes and atonement is needed. Even Guldar saved an elf now and then. I am sure Sharitia has had a bad day and kicked a puppy and Ranan has had a good day and fed one.

[ancientempathy]

moulinous said:

"Decide how your character acts, what she/he likes, what their wants out of life is, what scares them, and what makes them angry. Race and alignment are good places to start when thinking about your character's personailty, but they are bad places to stop...Your character's personailty can change over time. Just because you decide some basic facts about your character's personality when you create the character does not mean you need to abide by those facts as if they were holy writ. Let your character evolve and grow the way real people do..."

Taken from the Player's Handbook pg 94. In short, play your character and do not worry about your alignment as much and you will be fine. Be true to your character and as I saw someone else with a great saying say...Role Play not Roll Play. Sometimes paladins fall and monks make mistakes and atonement is needed. Even Guldar saved an elf now and then. I am sure Sharitia has had a bad day and kicked a puppy and Ranan has had a good day and fed one.

Ahh..I like that quote =) Unfortunatly I don't own the Players Handbook =\

And if anyone else wants to, then please feel free to discuss their character like what Isabelle did. Interesting to hear of people's views =)

The 10 lawful points dropped was a long time ago. It kind of bugs me and it kind of doesnt, but I think that's just because it was unexpected (me being a new player at the time and RPing my first paladin. It just shook me). As per my own characters current circumstances, and a good influence as to why I posted this thread. He's just been heavily pressed lately with things: his patience tested and his codes/ethics needing to be kept in highest account, due to the RP situations he's been placed in.

AWESOME times too. I have to thank Phelzaron and Harlee for certain recent occurances hehe

And truthfully, yeah...it's hard being a paladin. The difficulty is felt =) But thats a good thing

[Toreavamp]

I think what's troublesome about alignment and video games is we don't have a DM constantly watching, and they don't always know what goes before an action. Certainly in some cases the intentions, motivations and what not doesn't really matter on wether an act is good, evil, lawful or chaotic. But in other cases they, or at least so I think. To be a bit more specific I'll tell the story of how Aren came to hate Lucius as much as she did.

Way back when she had just arrived she'd been charmed of Veshal (and he of her) and they spend much time together. Amongst Veshal's friends were several "questionable" people, including Lucius. Aren really hated any necromancy spell even more back then, and Veshal knew this. I believe he'd mentioned something to Lucius and Aren had given a few hints on her belief too before they sat out through the orcs north of Suzail to the crypt there. Lucius had casted a few necromancy school spells against the orcs to which Aren had not reacted because 1)she couldn't identify them with her low spellcraft and 2)they were in battle and she wasn't even looking in Lucius direction. She managed this later where they fought a single creature. She withdraw from the fight and spoke with Veshal, the rest of the party just continued on as they spoke and eventually she insisted she and Veshal should turn back. By then the party was a good part in front of them and they decided to go back with out telling the rest.

Aren and Veshal got five chaotic point for that, for leaving the party in a time they were needed, while the party (and Lucius) didn't recieve anything for leaving them standing alone nor casting spells they'd been mentioned not to.

Love
Hanne

PS: I'm not making remarks to Lucius, he and I have a great time playing out their hate.

[edit] PPS: I'm neihter taking a hit out at the DMs, only meaning to point out some of the limitations a videogame has compared to PnP.

[Vlad]

There is a problem with scripted shifts. They affect whole the party.
In the haunted house in Suzail Randal asked us to not steal what was in in the coffins.
He played his alignement. But Griz didn't listen him and stole some things when we didn't watch him. All of us got an alignment shift toward chaotic...(I wad rather happy with that )...In such cases only the thief should got this shift, not the other members of the party, specially if they are not really involved in the theft.

I could say the same about undead summoning. If you travel with a wizard who suddenly summon an undead without any warnings, why would you lose some good points? You could have destroyed the undead in disagreement and still have lost the good points...This is not fair.

[HeatherRae]

vlademonic said:

There is a problem with scripted shifts. They affect whole the party.
In the haunted house in Suzail Randal asked us to not steal what was in in the coffins.
He played his alignement. But Griz didn't listen him and stole some things when we didn't watch him. All of us got an alignment shift toward chaotic...(I wad rather happy with that )...In such cases only the thief should got this shift, not the other members of the party, specially if they are not really involved in the theft.

I could say the same about undead summoning. If you travel with a wizard who suddenly summon an undead without any warnings, why would you lose some good points? You could have destroyed the undead in disagreement and still have lost the good points...This is not fair.

The response that I have been given before (and agree with, btw) is that you are responsible for who you travel with.

If you travel with people who are likely to go grave robbing, then expect an alignment shift. Similarly, if you are travelling with people likely to summon undead, expect an alignment shift.

If you don't want to risk an alignment shift, don't travel with those people.

Liadan once got 6 evil points (the only evil points she has ever gotten) during the Redmist Riots because a member of her massive party started whacking the townsfolk that were trying to kill him. *shrugs*

[EDM Entori]

in such a case your character would have received the points for traveling with him, and a reflection of why he never got to know the people he was traveling with better before he went looking for death with them. Such a reflection could cause him to look at things diffrently and regain those goodie points in the end through good actions.

point in fact there is, when you go adventuring, it is a very risky thing, characters should have their most trusted beside them. think about what you risk. my best example is the last mythal book 1, forsaken house. Theres an adventurer party scene, in the novel where the group starts off, but only so many of main characters friends return, when another character is introduced there is a huge trust issue.

If your traveling with a wizard who suddenly summons undead, and it suprises you or your character... well how well does he know him.

as for randal.. why would a paladin be traveling with a dirty little theif like griz?
....rather chaotic action there.

the point system works and truely if you sit and think about reflects in someway what your character has done, as points are the result of actions. ((thus alignment is a result of actions))

many people go adventuring, without thought of who they travel with. Often gives DM's (from what I've heard) and characters wondering if its ooc, or is there something more to the so called LG character.

Exception to the rule would be in cases where characters are forced to travel together against a common foe. whatever their reasons.

its all Food for thought, but seems like theres a lot less -thought- and more doing on FRC lately, reflect on your characters actions, when you play them, and how you want them to be seen. to others.

I think I'm only restating the obvious so I'll end rant here, enjoy and game on

[moulinous]

Many of the evil PCs on this server and including ones I play do not act evil in front of others. Not traveling with someone because you know their alignment ooc is not kosher and smacks of meta gaming in a sense.
I knew one of the merchants I traveled with when Guldar was around once in awhile was not of the best intentions and a bit evil ooc. Yet he was always nice to ole Guldie so he traveled with him. Helgrin and Dornak being typical Stouts were of a lawful bent but traveled with Guldie and knew once in awhile they would get shifts as it happens. It is the price of traveling with anyone that actions will affect you but saying that you are not going to travel with someone because they might or might not behave this way or that smacks of elitism.
You can only perceive what a PC is and NOT know the true alignment of anyone. If Randal travels with Griz that is is prerogative because maybe Griz has always been forthcoming to Randal and so Randal does not perceive him the same way Ent would. Before casting well, that is a chaotic act to travel with him stone, maybe you should re-examine the way you look at alignments and such.
A paladin is exemplary in his behavior and a champion of his god. Look at Dragonlance and you will see an excellent study in how some good and evil and in between is drawn to one another. The Twins Series was a perfect example in Raistlin and Chrysainia I think her name was. Pure good and pure evil that traveled and loved and had adventure...

[Grozer]

moulinous said:

Many of the evil PCs on this server and including ones I play do not act evil in front of others. Not travelling with someone because you know their alignment ooc is not kosher and smacks of metagaming in a sense.
I knew one of the merchants I travelled with when Guldar was around once in awhile was not of the best intentions and a bit evil ooc. Yet he was laways nice to ole Guldie so he travelled with him. Helgrin and Dornak being typical Stouts were of a lawful bent but travelled with Guldie and knew once in awhile they would get shifts as it happens. It is the price of travelling with anyone that actions will affect you but saying that you are not going to travel with someone because they might or might not behave this way or that smacks of elitism.
You can only percieve what a pc is and NOT know the true alignment of anyone. If Randal travels with Griz that is is perogative because maybe Griz has always been forthcoming to Randal and so Randal does not percieve him the same way Ent would. Before casting well, that is a chatioc act to travel with him stone, maybe you should re-examine the way you look at alignments and such.
A paladin is exmplary in his behaviour and a champion of his god. Look at Dragonlance and you will see an excellent study in how some good and evil and inbetween is drawn to one another. The Twins Series was a perfect example in Raistlin and Chrysainia I think her name was. Pure good and pure evil that travelled and loved and had adventure...

Well there is the difference. This merchant was nice to you, so Guldie never saw the evil in them and therefore most likely no reason NOT to travel with them. I dont think anyone is suggesting not to travel with someone because of alignment but if you are traveling with someone and see an act that would not be acceptable for your character THEN it may be a moment to reconsider.

[moulinous]

Which is what I am saying as well. I was using the example of Randal and Griz as since we do not know what the dynamics of the two traveling together so making a blanket statement of saying the two should not travel together as that would be a chaotic act is not correct.
Same with choosing who you are with to party up with. You never know (whether you as a player knows your character does not) who is what alignment. Who is to say a LG is not a bit greedy and does such grandiose good deeds to make up for the guilt of hoarding gems? Character flaws and imperfections aside, a ethos one strives to live up to is what alignments are. They are not as black and white as you would think.
I am just saying that being an alignment should augment the fun and not set it in stone and if you choose who you hang with so to speak by rep, well...Ranan would be even more lonely,lol.

[dakotastrider]

moulinous said:

Many of the evil PCs on this server and including ones I play do not act evil in front of others. Not travelling with someone because you know their alignment ooc is not kosher and smacks of metagaming in a sense.
I knew one of the merchants I travelled with when Guldar was around once in awhile was not of the best intentions and a bit evil ooc. Yet he was laways nice to ole Guldie so he travelled with him. Helgrin and Dornak being typical Stouts were of a lawful bent but travelled with Guldie and knew once in awhile they would get shifts as it happens. It is the price of travelling with anyone that actions will affect you but saying that you are not going to travel with someone because they might or might not behave this way or that smacks of elitism.
You can only percieve what a pc is and NOT know the true alignment of anyone. If Randal travels with Griz that is is perogative because maybe Griz has always been forthcoming to Randal and so Randal does not percieve him the same way Ent would. Before casting well, that is a chatioc act to travel with him stone, maybe you should re-examine the way you look at alignments and such.
A paladin is exmplary in his behaviour and a champion of his god. Look at Dragonlance and you will see an excellent study in how some good and evil and inbetween is drawn to one another. The Twins Series was a perfect example in Raistlin and Chrysainia I think her name was. Pure good and pure evil that travelled and loved and had adventure...

Well, I for one, think that additional information should be made to those observing or in close proximity of certain types of evil characters. Evil Necromancers, especially Palemasters should give off some sort of aura, that would make Paladins, Clerics of Good deities, Druids, and perhaps even elves good alignment feel nervous about them in the least. In the rule book regarding PaleMasters, you will read all the benefits mechanics-wise for the class, but it doesn't discuss the negatives, mainly the RP implications of being a creature that draws energy from death, and devotes itself to such goals. That doesn't even take into consideration the physical attributes that would be noticeable to all (Bone Skin lvl 1, Deathless Vigor, lvl 5, Undead Graft, lvl 6 etc) All of these "benefits" should carry a heavy penalty when it comes into interaction with other people in the world (not just PC's) that do not have a similar mindset.

If any character sits in town, all cloaked up an covered from head to toe, and doesn't show its face, I cannot see how anyone can be accused of meta-gaming for being distrustful. And if they are ever seen to behave in a friendly behavior to others that are known to be of ill intent, especially if they would say, follow them out of town willingly, then even more credibility would be lost. I think it would be expected that such PC's that walk through town, or hang around in places where many others hang out, they would cause much suspicion. People would talk behind their backs, wondering why they feel to keep themselves covered from head to toe, and the uncomfortableness people feel around them. Any negative type of interactions (insults, threats, inappropriate snickers at others expense) would have a greater affect, to those observing.

And in regards to going around cloaked and covered, this suspicion would apply to Goods or Neutrals as well, until they became known and trusted.

I am not saying that evils should be required to go around with a sign around their neck saying what and who they are. However, part of the price of playing a character that has such freedoms from having to follow laws or moral standards, would be that they would gain a negative reputation, even more quickly then their opposite would gain a positive reputation. ((Bad news always travels faster.)) Evils have it easier in regards to RP, in the regard to how that they can almost always justify joining a Good party, as they can claim greedy goals, or are trying to build up trust to screw over the party in the future. Goods, on the other hand, are handicapped in such regards, because its much harder for them to justify joining an Evil party, or even allowing someone Evil into the group, if they have suspicions. For these reasons, I do not think its meta-gaming, or even unreasonable for those of non-evil alignments to be apprehensive of those that display suspicious behavior of any sort.

[Grozer]

dakotastrider said:

Well, I for one, think that additional information should be made to those observing or in close proximity of certain types of evil characters. Evil Necromancers, especially Palemasters should give off some sort of aura, that would make Paladins, Clerics of Good deities, Druids, and perhaps even elves good alignment feel nervous about them in the least. In the rule book regarding PaleMasters, you will read all the benefits mechanics-wise for the class, but it doesn't discuss the negatives, mainly the RP implications of being a creature that draws energy from death, and devotes itself to such goals. That doesn't even take into consideration the physical attributes that would be noticeable to all (Bone Skin lvl 1, Deathless Vigor, lvl 5, Undead Graft, lvl 6 etc) All of these "benefits" should carry a heavy penalty when it comes into interaction with other people in the world (not just PC's) that do not have a similar mindset.

So what you are suggesting is granting detect alignment to certain classes? Well the problem with doing that even though the rulebook grants the ability/spell is the rulebook also grants spells to counter such an ability not to mention the specifics of how difficult detect alignment actually is. It is NOT instanteous... it takes rounds of effort this plus a number of other reasons is why DMs control it on FRC and rightfully so.

dakotastrider said:

That doesn't even take into consideration the physical attributes that would be noticeable to all (Bone Skin lvl 1, Deathless Vigor, lvl 5, Undead Graft, lvl 6 etc) All of these "benefits" should carry a heavy penalty when it comes into interaction with other people in the world (not just PC's) that do not have a similar mindset.

So why assume those characteristics are clearly visible? Like a barkskin spell, does it actually turn the person skin into bark or give the properties? I would argue the later, similarly I see Bone Skin the same way. It grants the properties but not necessarily the appearance. Now the bone arm for PMs is different but easily concealable.

dakotastrider said:

If any character sits in town, all cloaked up an covered from head to toe, and doesn't show its face, I cannot see how anyone can be accused of meta-gaming for being distrustful. And if they are ever seen to behave in a friendly behavior to others that are known to be of ill intent, especially if they would say, follow them out of town willingly, then even more credibility would be lost. I think it would be expected that such PC's that walk through town, or hang around in places where many others hang out, they would cause much suspicion. People would talk behind their backs, wondering why they feel to keep themselves covered from head to toe, and the uncomfortableness people feel around them. Any negative type of interactions (insults, threats, inappropriate snickers at others expense) would have a greater affect, to those observing.

So good/neutral characters, even commoners never go around wearing hood and cloak? So I guess they dont wear black either? Sorry I have to disagree here. I dont think its uncommon. Second I dont think 'talking to' or associating known evil character automatically 'makes' said person suspicious. If that was the case I have seen Sharita speaking with these individuals many times... should I assume she is evil? Obviously not. Blanket statements dont work.

As to using negative comments, well again I would disagree. I dont believe good characters NEVER insult each other or make disparaging remarks.

dakotastrider said:

I am not saying that evils should be required to go around with a sign around their neck saying what and who they are. However, part of the price of playing a character that has such freedoms from having to follow laws or moral standards, would be that they would gain a negative reputation, even more quickly then their opposite would gain a positive reputation. ((Bad news always travels faster.)) Evils have it easier in regards to RP, in the regard to how that they can almost always justify joining a Good party, as they can claim greedy goals, or are trying to build up trust to screw over the party in the future. Goods, on the other hand, are handicapped in such regards, because its much harder for them to justify joining an Evil party, or even allowing someone Evil into the group, if they have suspicions. For these reasons, I do not think its meta-gaming, or even unreasonable for those of non-evil alignments to be apprehensive of those that display suspicious behavior of any sort.

Well I disagree. I dont believe its easier for evils to join a good party... in fact I think its quite difficult if you are truely playing evil. Can you use those base RP reasons to make it happen? Yes, but that in my opinion is just not RPing the character. Assuming no one has idea there is no reason NOT to party with good/neutral characters, in fact if you play a follower of Cyric it might even make sense to deceive them for some greater reason. But if known, greed should not be a viable reason nor should building up trust? I mean how can you build up trust if you are KNOWN to be an evil doer... pretty much doesnt make sense. Again these are my opinions. Has Ranan ever partied with good characters.. yes, back when he was unknown, hell Manshin thought they were good friends. But the reason for traveling with him was never about greed.

Ah I best shut up this really wasnt the point of this thread anyway...

[EDM Entori]

If a person acts good one would not get good points, alignments are reflections of acts. If griz steals while in a party with randal, then thats a character flaw in my opinion on randals behalf. yes your right randal is no less the paladin for doing so, as such an acts (one time only) would not shift randal to neutral good. and being a paladin would quickly shift back, via good acts.

I'm not suggesting OOCly not going adventuring with someone because of their alignment, but put thought into how your character may perceive that.

heh and Griz is pretty shady. Like I said somethings cannot be controled due to this video game wonder. But I mean do to that mechanics crap happens. ..

but for the sake of the conversation randal griz were merely examples. and alignments and points systems seems very confused of late.

albeit I've never played PnP I've learned alot here.

if your in a party and someone summons undead. and paladin smites undead and chatises evil necro. pnp wise, a DM (if I understand it correctly) would void an alignmentshift. Good thing with all these new Dm's is that they can see these sorts of things.

Alignments really are a balancing act, due to character flaws as mouli points out. I myself did not take an urn to be a grave of any kind... earned myself a black mark there, (ooc) but then I understand my character did such, and he now understands what he sees as a human 'custom' and has tried to repent. tis why he has in the past bordered NG CG LG. Ents gone through many stages, as do all characters its a dynamic.

But thought into the types of people one travels with does lead one to question. If you go traveling with phelzaron as a good character and he summons undead. Say for argument your playing evil as a good character. firstly I see this as an chaotic act, as your hiding identity, secondly a evil act as you did not intervein, however with information learned you may tell purple dragon A that this person has done so and you witnessed it, lawful and good action.

So your right aligments are a dynamic. But the base point is that our system works to an extent, its not perfect, but scripting only goes so far.

if you made it so person commiting act only got the points, well thats wrong to, as most chaotic types wouldn't mind lifting a scroll off the shelf of a someone your trying to save, as he got himself in his own predicament.

like I said above is a hypothetical situations but you know I have a hard time understanding it myself so maybe I'm off. I like to see feedback conversation seems to lead to understanding as its not off topic.

as towards to title of the thread, I'd lean to say actions that cause a DM to give you a shift, means a DM took notice, and gave you a little reward/punishment, which is inspiring to see as you know you've been noticed, and it either allows you to keep your character as you want him and say in case of a pally do a few more lawful things, or in case of a theif pick a few more pockets, it just means your RP is noticed, and thats always a good feeling, when someone stands out.

sometimes for the wrong intentions to the player, but I always love DM love.

anyways peace and feel free to comment

[moulinous]

You bring up a couple of valid points so let me address them in order...
Being evil is just as hard to play as any other alignment if not more so. Ask some fo the people that have tried and failed to play evil that are epic good guys and found how truly diffucult it is. I kow that it may seem a easier time to rp a evil joining a good group but the Harpers and such inflintrating the bad, the shift of Phelzaron from this to that. Ranan being seen as a hero and a villian. Ever changing allys for evil fellows and the same cast mostly for the good side. Shartia, Kelric, Crom to name some fo the good guys who have been here forever and the bad guys there is Ranan and ....yep, that is all who is left,lol.
With in the adventuring culture so to speak you have a hundred different regions, races and beliefs. There are the Sunnites who are open and daring and show skin like you would not believe. There is the elfs and their green cloaks and dark forest colored clothes. There is Unthgar barbarians and Stouts and of course mages and such who all are a bit strange to normal folk and all are seen witha bit of humprh so to speak by the commoners. Someone dressed in a shadowed hood and talking queitly to himself could be a stoic ranger or a arch mage necromancer or Boozey the Local Drunk.
In other threads we have talked about how the adventuring people are more open to accepting different fellows and lasses and this would seem to indicate it would go to people dressed in head to toe black. Heck, in such a large multi god realm, black dressed people could be of Kelmevor, Mystra or Shar...you just dont know. People do talk and bad news does travel fast but one person saying I heard someone in Suzail killed a PDK is a lot different than someone saying Elugaziel the Rogue was seen fleeing after he killed a PDK. Rumours and bad news is just that rumours first and foremost.
Now people partying up for whatever reason should not be seen as anything bad and yes, this is coming froma dedicated soloist who also has people that only group as well. Ignoring the summoning of a undead is not right if you are a follower of someone who is morally against it. Leaving in the middle of an adventure can and does happen. I know I left a group in the middle of a dungeon more than once as my pc would never have dealt with it.
Your right on the feeling vibe but it is not something supported on the server. Paladins and clerics of good faith do not have detect evil. Nor do bad guys get detect good. So we all must rely on what we see more than anything. Seeing someone dressed in black in this day and age with a hood and such would be a bit scary but then so would a half orc barbarian and if you allow one to be around and keep your company then you must allow or at least give the chance to the other would you not?

[dakotastrider]

Just want to clarify, that I am not suggesting the Detect Evil spell or ability. As suggested, it would be more of a vibe, that it would be the responsibility of the evil one to rp appropriately. And this would not be something detectable in your average evil character, only those that willingly and purposely attempt to grow in power by the use of methods of necromancy, demonology, or other dark arts. It would not be good, for the Detect spell, as it would show anyone that has Evil on their character sheet. I am trying to say there is a difference between 'evil' and 'EVIL'

Also, as I tried to suggest, being hooded and covered head to toe, does not just apply to making evils appear suspicious, but it gives any character that impression. My goods would be reluctant to party with anyone that refuses to look them in the eye and show them their face. And while I have yet to start an evil on this server, I have played them, and they would be just as distrustful before putting their lives into the hands of a stranger. While people may become more accustomed to seeing people attired in such a manner, the point is, someone that covers their face, usually has something to hide. And there is nothing wrong with that, but I think it should be expected that people rp their characters appropriately in reaction to that, and not just ignore the fact that the person talking to them, feels the need not to show themselves.

[ancientempathy]

My..

I wasn't expecting to read all of this when I came on the forums today. Much of what has been said, I think, is off-topic somewhat, but it's still interesting to read at least. My thread was just poorly worded to begin with. =\

I'm not going to type-out a justification for Randal's actions on here either.

Find out ICly.

If a DM wants it then I can send it to a DM via PM. But, sorry if anyone was expecting an explanation. I'm sure the DM's are keeping a close eye on us paladin players as it is anyway, to make sure we dont goof up. Too much at least. Randal is my first paladin I've ever tryed to fully "go all the way" with. Most others I just gave up after a week.

And that's because the other servers I went to didnt provided as good a DM team and community, like FRC does here.

And please...I don't mind my character being used as an example, but maybe Griz does? Just something to consider is all

[cloakedandhooded]

My character covers his face all the time. I get a kick out of watching how people react to it. (That's really all I have to say on the topic.)

[Masterbard Alyster Darkharp]

I think there are about 7 characters who have seen Darkharp's face. (all I have to say as well) Most never have, and never will.

[Vlad]

heatherrae said:

The response that I have been given before (and agree with, btw) is that you are responsible for who you travel with.

If you travel with people who are likely to go grave robbing, then expect an alignment shift. Similarly, if you are travelling with people likely to summon undead, expect an alignment shift.

If you don't want to risk an alignment shift, don't travel with those people.

I do not agree totally.
You cannot be responsible for who you travel with all the time especially when you don't know them well and when you don't see them stealing.

Travelling (ONLY travelling) with evil isn't an evil act. You cannot blame someone for travelling with an evil guy. You don't have any means to detect him as an evil one, unless he commits an evil act.
Should every character, on the server, travelling or talking with characters as Dusk, earn evil points? I don't think so.
Does travelling with Lawful characters make you more Lawful? No. You can disagree with them most of the time.

And even if the Evilness of some character is obvious, such as in the case of palemasters, do you become evil for travelling or talking with them? They do not commits evil acts all the time. Since summoning undead is viewed as an evil thing they might be clever by choosing to not summoning any in the front of people.

When someone commits a murders he is the only one being judged...not his family or his friends.

Alignment is something difficult to handle and particularly in a video game.

My point is that only acts should matter.

[Vlad]

moulinous said:

Which is what I am saying as well. I was using the example of Randal and Griz as since we do not know what the dynamics of the two traveling together so making a blanket statement of saying the two should not travel together as that would be a chaotic act is not correct.
Same with choosing who you are with to party up with. You never know (whether you as a player knows your character does not) who is what alignment. Who is to say a LG is not a bit greedy and does such grandiose good deeds to make up for the guilt of hoarding gems? Character flaws and imperfections aside, a ethos one strives to live up to is what alignments are. They are not as black and white as you would think.
I am just saying that being an alignment should augment the fun and not set it in stone and if you choose who you hang with so to speak by rep, well...Ranan would be even more lonely,lol.

Well said.
I agree with that.

And i will add that sometimes you can make errors unwillingly or don't know how to act properly in a given situation.