A eulogy for Alignment in CRPGs

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

notice how you just devolve into insults every time I prove you wrong?

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

The LG wizard who considers having great power to be a great responsibility, and tries to impress upon others the importance of judicious use of magic as a tool with which to improve not only their own lives but the lives of others.

This isn’t necessarily lawful good FYI. You think that by adding adjectives like “judicious” you’re going to describe character motives as lawful. Most of your examples are like this. Laughable.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

I've already shot your argument so full of holes that at this point I'm just picking on the autistic naziboo because it's fun

cry about it

 

[anvi]

I don't care if alignment goes away. They should just make everything assuming chaotic good. If you want anything else you are a bad person and shouldn't be catered for with video games anyway. I liked the hundreds of factions in EQ though and if you attack some guards, all the guards will hate you and maybe some other cities will try to kill you. But there may be some corrupt guards who love you. And you can change your faction with anyone by doing quests or slaughtering. They were doing this and more in the 90s with no budget and other games should be ashamed.

"Everquest" and "no budget" should not occupy your mind at the same time

EQ budget was 3 million. Baldurs Gate 2 had 5 million a year later and that didn't need all that multiplayer code and whatnot.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

The more we post itt the more I’m reminded of just how cool the alignment system from 2E is/was.

Going back and reading up on the Paladin has me breaking out all the old manuals now just to read them.

This is what they took from us. But so long as you keep a copy, it’s not really gone.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

The more we post itt the more I’m reminded of just how cool the alignment system from 2E is/was.

Going back and reading up on the Paladin has me breaking out all the old manuals now just to read them.

This is what they took from us. But so long as you keep a copy, it’s not really gone.

Cool, does that mean you're done making an absolute ass of yourself (for now)?

 

[Ninjerk]

The more we post itt the more I’m reminded of just how cool the alignment system from 2E is/was.

Going back and reading up on the Paladin has me breaking out all the old manuals now just to read them.

This is what they took from us. But so long as you keep a copy, it’s not really gone.

Auction sites are still full of old AD&D 2nd ed. books like the ones my late cousin owned. The covers alone hit the ol' feels.

 

[Atlantico]

The more we post itt the more I’m reminded of just how cool the alignment system from 2E is/was.

Very true. AD&D 2nd ed. is something special, for the type of game it represents, it is second to none.

I remember back in the day, people were poo-pooing it for not being as versatile as GURPS or as edgy as Vampire/Werewolf/Cyberpunk, which may all be true - but AD&D 2nd ed. really nailed the classic medieval fantasy strategic role playing game mechanics like nothing before or after. It was really polished and well though out.

I still have the core books and Gold Box FR setting. This thread makes me want to set up another group and play a few sessions.

 

[DraQ]

The opinion of a given individual isn’t a reputation.

Sure it is. For example Atlantico has earned a reputation of a butthurt retard with me ITT.

Do you have thousands of characters in your game or even hundreds of characters in a faction?

If I don't I am certainly abstracting and need faction reputation to fill the gaps.

I guess you’d want crime levels within a faction to know if the cops should be called, but that’s not reputation, that’s a GTA wanted meter.

It is reputation. In the eyes of local law.

Mechanically all those things are the same. There is no point drawing distinction between them - they are a form of record of your prior actions that change the way NPCs react.

The point is that none of these systems are “necessary”. You can turn everything into a play pretend larp and not even have a health bar if you want.

And you accuse others of being bethestards.

Which is my point.

Alignment is an abstraction of your personality. The fact that you could make it more detailed or that it isn’t strictly necessary for a game to function doesn’t mean you should remove the system entirely any more than reputation should be eliminated for the above reasons.

You don't understand the point of abstraction.
Interestingly you seem to have omitted the most relevant part with another - completely useless - "system" I asked you to consider.

Except you aren’t arguing that. You’re arguing to remove the system entirely. You’re not even drawing a dick, you’re drawing nothing.

I'm arguing to not pretend to have a system if you actually don't.

But fine, want your dick drawings, have your dick drawings - here's your "system":
On character generation you are offered a text box in which you can enter a short bio of your character. Once entered it remains visible on the character sheet.
There, you can even put "8=============D" in there if you want.

It doesn’t. A good DM (or game designer) won’t allow this. And even if they do, as I’ve said, a flawed implementation of they system isn’t the fault of the system, it’s the fault of the designer.

You said that already. You haven't said how without breaking a thousand more important things mostly involving player agency.
That's the whole point: the system is too broad strokes - you make it ineffectual or actively harmful, there is no happy middle ground. And due to the way it's all-encompassing and interacts with alignment targeting magic it leaks information that breaks all sorts of interesting storytelling regardless of the rest of the implementation, so even if it's ineffectual, it's still not harmless.

Second, you need an alignment system, a system of tracking who a person is on the inside, to deal with the other two situations.

Except you don't need, want and can't have system that tracks who a person is on the inside for player characters. That's the whole fucking point. Player is the only one who knows that - assuming they care.
What you can and should have is system tracking who a person is on the outside for the PCs and dedicated system directly driving goals and behavior for NPCs. And neither of those should be directly exposed to the player - if only to not break the illusion and prevent being gamed. They are not meant to be systems per se, more sort of emulator of what is usually happening in GM's head.
And that's why reputation and ethos are the things you heave to make do.
Inside of PC's head (with very few exceptions you can track objectively) is off limits to your mechanics, inner workings of the world and NPCs are off limits to the player.
But you can still use ethos to govern reputation with gods or whatever forces provide divine magic (also possibly other kinds of magic) - except this time you can make sure player is on the same page as you regarding what will make their paladin fall and stuff like that.
Ethos makes for a fine interface between stuff hidden from the player and stuff hidden from the mechanics (or DM) - and like any good interface it also serves as a means of clear, unambiguous communication - something alignment does not and cannot do due to being sophomoric philosophical bullshit.

And this inability has been amply illustrated in this very thread by no one else than alignmentfags themselves, trying - and failing - to get on the same page regarding whether or not rejecting one ethos in favour of another is chaotic, lawful or neutral (and what 'neutral' even means in this context) or whether Expatriate kit makes sense within alignment system.

Meanwhile, a live GM wouldn't have a problem understanding the concept of an expatriate paladin and making it work in their game even without "help" of alignment system, while an ethos and reputation based system would have no problem accepting a character that rejected one of two conflicting codes, nor consequences of it applied via reputation.

You are trying to argue for mandating the use of square bicycle wheels regardless of whether or not someone even owns a bicycle - that's about the extent of alignment's usefulness.

So you see why I doubt your sincerity when you claim to want these things. I offer you an obvious solution and you refuse it.

I refuse your solution because your solution is of dubious value to put it charitably.
And I explain it. In detail. Repeatedly. While providing an alternative devoid of crippling flaws. Which you refuse because of what exactly?
Should I doubt your sincerity or intellect?

That combined with your obsession with walking sims makes me doubt that you truly want any of what you say that you do.

You know who in this thread is actually obsessed with walking sims?

Hint: It's the person who can't shut the fuck up about them even for the duration of a single post.

Pathfinder Kingmaker alignment before and after dot jpg
Anomen alignment before and after dot jpg

I haven't played PF:KM (if only because of RTWP, I might consider the next one which I understand is being made).
BG2 example has nothing to do with alignment system. It's a hand-scripted questline (so not systemic by default) and it would have worked the same without relying on alignment.

Neither game has a great implementation of the alignment system. BG is not reactive enough and PFKM is too reactive.

And no game will, for the reasons I explained above.

Yes, however, as I said, the paladin in question hasn’t changed his ethos. His vow was betrayed and so he renounced it. It may damage his belief in the infallibility of the law in the case of the Expatriate kit, but he’s still lawful and restricts himself to lawful thinking and actions.

I don't have any problem with expatriate character concept. Merely demonstrating how natural it would be to describe this character in terms of ethos (and reputation) and how artificial and pointless the whole discussion regarding their position of alignment spectrum is.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin again?

 

[Atlantico]

Sure it is. For example Atlantico has earned a reputation of a butthurt retard with me ITT.

Oh my, how will I sleep tonight?

Some autist on the internet doesn't understand a simple game mechanic which has been used without issue since the 1980s has me living rent free in his head. I really genuinely care about how you feel about me. Tell me more, please.

In the meanwhile, I'll explain this to you real simple like:

Since you are autistic, you cannot understand this simple game mechanic, and that's too bad.

That's because you are autistic. You are mentally deficient.

But even though you cannot understand this, it doesn't mean you're right. You just don't understand why you're wrong.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

Sure it is. For example Atlantico has earned a reputation of a butthurt retard with me ITT.

Oh my, how will I sleep tonight?

Some autist on the internet doesn't understand a simple game mechanic which has been used without issue since the 1980s has me living rent free in his head. I really genuinely care about how you feel about me. Tell me more, please.

In the meanwhile, I'll explain this to you real simple like:

Since you are autistic, you cannot understand this simple game mechanic, and that's too bad.

That's because you are autistic. You are mentally deficient.

But even though you cannot understand this, it doesn't mean you're right. You just don't understand why you're wrong.

"You're SO dull." Seriously. Boring.

 

[DraQ]

Sure it is. For example Atlantico has earned a reputation of a butthurt retard with me ITT.

Oh my, how will I sleep tonight?

You could try using your post as a sleeping aid. I couldn't even make it beyond the last line quoted.

 

[Atlantico]

You could try using your post as a sleeping aid. I couldn't even make it beyond the last line quoted.

Another classic telltale sign of autism is the tendency to take everything literally, due to an inability to discern meaning in a text normal people would easily understand.

Dad jokes are also a sign of poor social intelligence, though in and of themselves don't indicate autism, they are the only type of "witticism" available to people on the spectrum.

Most damning of all though, is that you don't understand a simple roleplaying system, because it describes something alien to you.

Though you cannot understand this system, it doesn't mean you're right. It just means, you don't understand why you're wrong.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

You could try using your post as a sleeping aid. I couldn't even make it beyond the last line quoted.

Another classic telltale sign of autism is the tendency to take everything literally, due to an inability to discern meaning in a text normal people would easily understand.

Dad jokes are also a sign of poor social intelligence, though in and of themselves don't indicate autism, they are the only type of "witticism" available to people on the spectrum.

Most damning of all though, is that you don't understand a simple roleplaying system, because it describes something alien to you.

Though you cannot understand this system, it doesn't mean you're right. It just means, you don't understand why you're wrong.

Oh, you were just pretending to be retarded as a joke?

 

[Atlantico]

Oh, you were just pretending to be retarded as a joke?

Dad jokes are also a sign of poor social intelligence, though in and of themselves don't indicate autism, they are the only type of "witticism" available to people on the spectrum.

You people just keep walking into verbal pwnage.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

Oh, you were just pretending to be retarded as a joke?

Dad jokes are also a sign of poor social intelligence, though in and of themselves don't indicate autism, they are the only type of "witticism" available to people on the spectrum.

It's what I deem your behavior worthy of. Good jokes are for people capable of appreciating more than 9 options on a "what's your philosophy towards the world and its inhabitants" chart.

You people just keep walking into verbal pwnage.

"I'M NOT OWNED! YOU'RE OWNED!" screams Atlantico as he shrivels up into a ball and cries into his dakimakura.

 

[Atlantico]

It's what I deem your behavior worthy of. Good jokes are for people capable of appreciating more than 9 options on a "what's your philosophy towards the world and its inhabitants" chart.

Alignment has nothing to do with "philosophy towards the world and its inhabitants". You people keep hammering down the fact, that you simply do not understand, either from disinterest or incapability, what this rather simple system is and what it does.

It's like debating the difference between red and green with a colorblind person. It's pointless, you're not capable of understanding something that comes naturally and instinctively to normal people.

That you cannot understand this system, doesn't mean you're right. It just means, you don't understand why you're wrong.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

It's what I deem your behavior worthy of. Good jokes are for people capable of appreciating more than 9 options on a "what's your philosophy towards the world and its inhabitants" chart.

Alignment has nothing to do with "philosophy towards the world and its inhabitants".

YOU: It is shorthand for the "why" - your motivations. (Extrapolated - your motivations for interacting with the game world in a certain fashion.)
ALSO YOU: IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE
LAMBCHOP: STOP MAKING FUN OF ME YOU'RE MEAN

Seriously what kind of two-tongued moron are you? What the hell else would it be for? Qualifying for your favorite epic pwnage OP Prestige Class? Are you seriously going to argue that a person's philosophy doesn't shape how they interact with the world? Are you seriously going to argue that someone would even have a philosophy that runs completely counter to their tendencies on this autistic chart? Hold on let me go roll a "CE" character that spends his day saving kittens from trees, helping children with their chores for no recompense and bettering the lives of others around him because, you know, the alignment has nothing to do with that.

 

[Atlantico]

YOU: It is shorthand for the "why" - your motivations. (Extrapolated - your motivations for interacting with the game world in a certain fashion.)
ALSO YOU: IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

One of the best ways to demonstrate whether a person understands something, is to ask that person to rewrite the topic, in his own words.

Here you've done just that, and the result is incomprehensible drivel.

You've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, by posting that garbled nonsense, that you neither understand the topic nor what I wrote.

The ironic thing, is that this was probably an attempt at a strawman fallacy argumentation, but inadvertently demonstrated your ignorance.

So the lesson is: autism does not equal intelligence. It just means you're mentally deficient in areas where normal people have no issues.

 

[Shitty Kitty]

YOU: It is shorthand for the "why" - your motivations. (Extrapolated - your motivations for interacting with the game world in a certain fashion.)
ALSO YOU: IT HAS NOTHING TO DO WITH THAT REEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE

One of the best ways to demonstrate whether a person understands something, is to ask that person to rewrite the topic, in his own words.

Here you've done just that, and the result is incomprehensible drivel.

You've proven beyond a shadow of a doubt, by posting that garbled nonsense, that you neither understand the topic nor what I wrote.

The ironic thing, is that this was probably an attempt at a strawman fallacy argumentation, but inadvertently demonstrated your ignorance.

So the lesson is: autism does not equal intelligence. It just means you're mentally deficient in areas where normal people have no issues.

"Ha! You don't understand my retarded alignment system!"

Yeah, because it's retarded. I'd need a lot more alcohol in my bloodstream before I could begin to grok your idiocy. It is by its nature a fucking nothingburger. It tells me nothing important. A person doesn't go around saying to themselves "THINK LAWFUL GOOD THOUGHTS! DO LAWFUL GOOD THINGS!" unless they're an utter invalid. You know, like you.

 

[Atlantico]

"Ha! You don't understand my retarded alignment system!"

Yeah, because it's retarded. I'd need a lot more alcohol in my bloodstream before I could begin to grok your idiocy. It is by its nature a fucking nothingburger. It tells me nothing important. A person doesn't go around saying to themselves "THINK LAWFUL GOOD THOUGHTS! DO LAWFUL GOOD THINGS!" unless they're an utter invalid. You know, like you.

QED

 

[Shitty Kitty]

People who communicate in nothings have nothing interesting to say.

QED

Like so.

Worst thing to ever happen to roleplaying is idiots like you coming in purporting to be intelligent. Alignment is like putting training wheels on a helicopter.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

Sure it is. For example Atlantico has earned a reputation of a butthurt retard with me ITT.

Ok, still not reputation. Reputation is judged by groups of people, not individuals.

If I don't I am certainly abstracting and need faction reputation to fill the gaps.

Nope. Just need individual estimations per character. We've been over this. It helps, but isn't strictly necessary. That doesn't mean it needs to be removed though, which was my point.

It is reputation. In the eyes of local law.

Nope. It's what level they are supposed to pursue you. Reputation has to do with your character in general. They could know you as a good man, yet still receive orders to pursue you.

All of this is obvious. You should know it. That's why I assume you're arguing in bad faith.

You don't understand the point of abstraction.

I understand it perfectly. That's why I don't want to remove the alignment system.

Shitty keeps making shitty examples instead of using abstractions he clearly hasn't even bothered to read or understand and we all see the result: "hurr durr the cleric of myrkul lawfully kills children for the greater good, therefore he is lawful good! I know adjectives! Alignments are unnecessary!"

I'm arguing to not pretend to have a system if you actually don't.

But fine, want your dick drawings, have your dick drawings - here's your "system":
On character generation you are offered a text box in which you can enter a short bio of your character. Once entered it remains visible on the character sheet.
There, you can even put "8=============D" in there if you want.

And your DM will just mark you Chaotic Neutral in his notes and subtract a point from your INT score lol

You said that already. You haven't said how without breaking a thousand more important things mostly involving player agency.

Here we are back at your not-so-secret desire to larp and be the head of every guild in Skyrim.

Rules are going to mean you can't do everything you want whenever you want. Tough, I know. Please collect your participation trophy elsewhere.

That's the whole point: the system is too broad strokes - you make it ineffectual or actively harmful, there is no happy middle ground. And due to the way it's all-encompassing and interacts with alignment targeting magic it leaks information that breaks all sorts of interesting storytelling regardless of the rest of the implementation, so even if it's ineffectual, it's still not harmless.

"THE SKY IS FALLING! THOUSANDS OF THINGS WILL BREAK! IT WONT WORK! IT ISNT A REAL SYSTEM! IT DOESNT EXIST!"

Bro, the system worked fine for years. Some people didn't understand the concept, but they learned. The issue was that new players were confused by it. Bean counters in management and marketing got involved and now we have it dumbed down to literal relativism. "Lawful Good DOES what most PEOPLE CONSIDER good." Now that's a real disaster. Provably, since they are phasing it out and didn't even want it in BG3.

Except you don't need, want and can't have system that tracks who a person is on the inside for player characters. That's the whole fucking point. Player is the only one who knows that - assuming they care.

Well, that's obviously incorrect and even Shitty would disagree with you, since he's tried to describe character motives multiple times (and failed to do so better than the alignment system).

Anyone can define character motives with out without an axis. It's just the axis systematizes it and makes it easier. That's important to have in a game played by more than one person for the same reason dice, hitpoints and specific spells are important - to keep everyone honest and playing the same game by the same rules.

What you can and should have is system tracking who a person is on the outside for the PCs and dedicated system directly driving goals and behavior for NPCs.

People's opinions don't account for who the character is within. In settings that are often focused on good vs evil like most fantasy, that's pretty important. People have already explained this to you and you responded only with dumb memes iirc.

Inside of PC's head (with very few exceptions you can track objectively) is off limits to your mechanics, inner workings of the world and NPCs are off limits to the player.

You say this and then you say:

But you can still use ethos to govern reputation with gods or whatever forces provide divine magic (also possibly other kinds of magic) - except this time you can make sure player is on the same page as you regarding what will make their paladin fall and stuff like that.

Which would call for an alignment system.

Even you understand it's needed.

Ethos makes for a fine interface between stuff hidden from the player and stuff hidden from the mechanics (or DM) - and like any good interface it also serves as a means of clear, unambiguous communication - something alignment does not and cannot do due to being sophomoric philosophical bullshit.

And this inability has been amply illustrated in this very thread by no one else than alignmentfags themselves, trying - and failing - to get on the same page regarding whether or not rejecting one ethos in favour of another is chaotic, lawful or neutral (and what 'neutral' even means in this context) or whether Expatriate kit makes sense within alignment system.

Meanwhile, a live GM wouldn't have a problem understanding the concept of an expatriate paladin and making it work in their game even without "help" of alignment system, while an ethos and reputation based system would have no problem accepting a character that rejected one of two conflicting codes, nor consequences of it applied via reputation.

You are trying to argue for mandating the use of square bicycle wheels regardless of whether or not someone even owns a bicycle - that's about the extent of alignment's usefulness.

Nice bold text. Magpie wouldn't even agree to use 2nd Edition rules for ages, so we already wouldn't have been playing D&D together since he thinks "outdated" (better) rules aren't worthwhile.

He and I both agree that breaking an oath is a chaotic act.

What he disagrees with me on is that renouncing a betrayed and therefore non-binding oath was a lawful act. And it doesn't really matter what his opinion on it was, since the rules of the game clearly state it's lawful, since there's no penalty for the Paladin to do so.

The rules are the rules. Are you saying that because one sperg thinks rolling a 20-sided die is unfair, that means D&D will never work and is a broken system?

Nah, don't play with people who won't follow the rules of the game. Problem solved. A computer would have even less problem with this, since egos and emotions don't get involved and they just follow the rules.

I refuse your solution because your solution is of dubious value to put it charitably.
And I explain it. In detail. Repeatedly. While providing an alternative devoid of crippling flaws. Which you refuse because of what exactly?
Should I doubt your sincerity or intellect?

"CRIPPLING FLAWS! I AM BEING CHARITABLE HERE! ITS SO BROKEN! IT NEVER WORKED! IGNORE ALL THE YEARS OF FUN YOU HAD PLAYING THE GAME!"

I haven't played PF:KM (if only because of RTWP, I might consider the next one which I understand is being made).

It's got native turn-based mode now iirc, but I haven't loaded it up in a while. I may now that I've done most of BG3 EA.

BG2 example has nothing to do with alignment system. It's a hand-scripted questline (so not systemic by default) and it would have worked the same without relying on alignment.

Incorrect. The point is that it showcased a datapoint shift. All alignment shifts in games without DMs are scripted, so that's a non-argument.

IRL, a DM would change his alignment or discuss a shift with the player.

And no game will, for the reasons I explained above.

"It can't be done perfect so it must not be done at all."

I'd prefer devs try and fail than quit and dumb things down. I think even BG would suffer loss without alignments. Certainly Planescape would.

Here's an idea: if you don't like it, play a game without it rather than arguing every game remove it.

I don't have any problem with expatriate character concept. Merely demonstrating how natural it would be to describe this character in terms of ethos (and reputation) and how artificial and pointless the whole discussion regarding their position of alignment spectrum is.

My discussion with magpie wasn't focused on the Expatriate's alignment until he briefly gave up arguing about oaths of fealty. Again, it's a non-issue as the rules clearly spell out that this OPTIONAL class kit is Lawful Good. Another self-solving problem, which shouldn't even have been an issue if he had bothered to hold himself to 2E's alignment system instead of whatever one is in his head.

How many angels can dance on the head of a pin again?

He says, writing walls of text about RPG systems he doesn't even like...

 

[Rinslin Merwind]

Ok, still not reputation. Reputation is judged by groups of people, not individuals.

Don't worry, Atlantico earned reputation of butthurt retard with me also. So, yeah, it's reputation.
If two people don't count for group for you (even though laws in some countries could define tow as group) - I pretty sure solid chunk of codexers who loged in just to witness some idiot on diarrea spree of ratings would say something about his reputation.

 

[a cut of domestic sheep prime]

Ok, still not reputation. Reputation is judged by groups of people, not individuals.

Don't worry, Atlantico earned reputation of butthurt retard with me also. So, yeah, it's reputation.
If two people don't count for group for you (even though laws in some countries could define tow as group) - I pretty sure solid chunk of codexers who loged in just to witness some idiot on diarrea spree of ratings would say something about his reputation.

You clearly don’t know English well enough to comment on the definitions of English words.