Post by Ben from Texas on May 20, 2017 21:19:43 GMT
I appreciated the discussion in this episode, and I agree with most of the points. Overall, though, I think that using Alignment I'd a good way to make sure a character concept isn't too shallow.
I've done some thinking on the topic, and I feel like I can describe the alignments in a way that feels less constraining than what's in the book, or how players typically describe it.
Lawful vs chaotic:
- A lawful character plays by the rules.
- A chaotic character breaks the rules.
- If following rules or breaking rules is not important to your character, just pick neutral.
When there is a conflict between these ideas, choose the one that's most important to your character concept.
I think a good example of this for me is Luke, Leia, and Han.
- Luke sees the Empire as evil and wants to fight to protect people. Once the Empire is defeated, he goes off on his own to teach new Jedi. Luke is neutral good.
- Leia doesn't just want to fight the Empire. She's a leader of the Rebellion, and she's fighting to reestablish the Republic as way of protecting freedom. Leia is lawful good.
- Han plays by his own rules. After the Empire is defeated, he goes back to being a smuggler, albeit a more altruistic one. I'd actually say that Han starts off as Chaotic Neutral, but moves to Chaotic Good after falling in with the good guys.
- Describing the characters this way helps highlight and simplify the differences between the characters in a way that helps drive the story. One example would be that Leia is hesitant and distrustful when Han uses his underworld contacts to help them hide from the Empire in ESB.
The episode mentioned Batman as an example of a character that could be described with multiple alignments, because of all of the different Batman stories that have been told. I actually think this helps demonstrate why alignment is a good thing.
- Is your Batman Chaotic Good? Then as the DM, it's my job to make sure you come into conflict with the law, and the story will be more like Batman Year One.
- Is your Batman Lawful Good? Then as a DM, it's my job to tempt you into breaking your own rules, and the story might be more like one of the alternate universe stories in which Batman actually breaks his one rule and kills the Joker.
- If following rules or breaking rules is not central to your character concept, just pick Neutral.
Good vs evil:
- A good character will make sacrifices or put themselves in harm's way to help others without any personal gain.
- An evil character will harm others for personal gain.
- A character that will do neither of these things (most of the time, at least) is neutral
- A character that will do both of these things is inconsistent, and could lead to story problems.
Choosing an alignment helps the DM understand the kinds of conflict that will create a compelling story for your character.
- If your character is Good, then as the DM I might start raising the stakes when you try to help someone. Maybe the character has to make a sacrifice that's too big, or has to make a deal with the devil to help the greater good.
- If your character is neutral, maybe the DM will offer you something valuable, but you have to cause harm to another character to get it. Or maybe they try to get you to help someone at a cost you wouldn't normally be willing to pay.
- If your character is evil, maybe the DM will try to make you feel a connection to another character or group, and then give you the opportunity to betray them for profit.
When you choose an alignment, you are telling the DM what kinds of conflict to include in the story. Good vs Evil and Lawful vs Chaotic are archetypal sources of conflict in storytelling. If you're going to throw alignment out, make sure the character is fleshed out enough to provide adequate sources of conflict both for the story, and with other players. That goes for True Neutral characters as well. I think True Neutral is basically like mot choosing an alignment.
I've done some thinking on the topic, and I feel like I can describe the alignments in a way that feels less constraining than what's in the book, or how players typically describe it.
Lawful vs chaotic:
- A lawful character plays by the rules.
- A chaotic character breaks the rules.
- If following rules or breaking rules is not important to your character, just pick neutral.
When there is a conflict between these ideas, choose the one that's most important to your character concept.
I think a good example of this for me is Luke, Leia, and Han.
- Luke sees the Empire as evil and wants to fight to protect people. Once the Empire is defeated, he goes off on his own to teach new Jedi. Luke is neutral good.
- Leia doesn't just want to fight the Empire. She's a leader of the Rebellion, and she's fighting to reestablish the Republic as way of protecting freedom. Leia is lawful good.
- Han plays by his own rules. After the Empire is defeated, he goes back to being a smuggler, albeit a more altruistic one. I'd actually say that Han starts off as Chaotic Neutral, but moves to Chaotic Good after falling in with the good guys.
- Describing the characters this way helps highlight and simplify the differences between the characters in a way that helps drive the story. One example would be that Leia is hesitant and distrustful when Han uses his underworld contacts to help them hide from the Empire in ESB.
The episode mentioned Batman as an example of a character that could be described with multiple alignments, because of all of the different Batman stories that have been told. I actually think this helps demonstrate why alignment is a good thing.
- Is your Batman Chaotic Good? Then as the DM, it's my job to make sure you come into conflict with the law, and the story will be more like Batman Year One.
- Is your Batman Lawful Good? Then as a DM, it's my job to tempt you into breaking your own rules, and the story might be more like one of the alternate universe stories in which Batman actually breaks his one rule and kills the Joker.
- If following rules or breaking rules is not central to your character concept, just pick Neutral.
Good vs evil:
- A good character will make sacrifices or put themselves in harm's way to help others without any personal gain.
- An evil character will harm others for personal gain.
- A character that will do neither of these things (most of the time, at least) is neutral
- A character that will do both of these things is inconsistent, and could lead to story problems.
Choosing an alignment helps the DM understand the kinds of conflict that will create a compelling story for your character.
- If your character is Good, then as the DM I might start raising the stakes when you try to help someone. Maybe the character has to make a sacrifice that's too big, or has to make a deal with the devil to help the greater good.
- If your character is neutral, maybe the DM will offer you something valuable, but you have to cause harm to another character to get it. Or maybe they try to get you to help someone at a cost you wouldn't normally be willing to pay.
- If your character is evil, maybe the DM will try to make you feel a connection to another character or group, and then give you the opportunity to betray them for profit.
When you choose an alignment, you are telling the DM what kinds of conflict to include in the story. Good vs Evil and Lawful vs Chaotic are archetypal sources of conflict in storytelling. If you're going to throw alignment out, make sure the character is fleshed out enough to provide adequate sources of conflict both for the story, and with other players. That goes for True Neutral characters as well. I think True Neutral is basically like mot choosing an alignment.