Talk:Alignments by Color (3.5e Variant Rule)

From Dungeons and Dragons Wiki
Jump to: navigation, search

Ratings[edit]

RatedFavor.png Cedric favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
This is an awesome start to adding more nuance to the notions of alignments.
RatedFavor.png Enigma favors this article and rated it 4 of 4!
I dislike the black and white aspect of having some people just be "Evil" so I'm hoping to use this as an alternative.

Defining Characters?

D&D alignment has not been defining characters for years, despite the lip-service 3.5 gives to that notion. What the mechanics actually support is the original purpose of indicating which side the character is on. I’m sure anyone seriously trying to use them to define a character would quickly give up in disgust. And just as well, frankly. While rules for which side the character is on are fairly pointless, rules for character personality are only worth the risks if the designer has a very clear idea of why mechanics personality should matter to the game. Otherwise, character personality is best handled freeform. Ideasmith (talk) 14:34, 25 June 2017 (MDT)

That's fine, you don't have to use this variant if you don't want to. --Ghostwheel (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2017 (MDT)

Changing Alignment[edit]

You give no rules for changing colors. I hope you aren’t keeping 3.5 alignment change, which I’ve described as “The DM makes a subjective decision as to whether the character’s behavior has crossed a vaguely-indicated line. This sets off an argument. ”. Even though your other changes may tone this down to ‘To change color pattern, tell the DM you want to, then try to act like the new color pattern until the DM feels like it’s enough. ’. Ideasmith (talk) 14:34, 25 June 2017 (MDT)

This ascribes alignment to motives, rather than actions. It's quite hard to change a character's most basic motivations, but if that changes, feel free to do so. --Ghostwheel (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2017 (MDT)

Creatures[edit]

I think a DM trying to use this might find a list of examples useful. Ideasmith (talk) 14:34, 25 June 2017 (MDT)

Feel free to add one if you'd like :-) --Ghostwheel (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2017 (MDT)

Spells and Abilities[edit]

I think what you meant by the first sentence is something like ‘For each ability or set of abilities that interacts with the alignment system, each color has its own version. Each character class counts as a set of abilities for this purpose. Where the ability interacts with another alignment, it instead interacts with the opposite color. ’. This is good in at least two ways: It sets a set of general principles rather than trying to handle things on a case-by-case basis. And it answers most relevant alignment-related questions. It still needs work, both in rewording for clarity, and for the remaining questions. (Examples: Does this cleric turn undead or rebuke undead? Just what color patterns may a druid have? Are paladins still required to respect legitimate authority? Do animate dead and bless water still have alignment descriptors?)

One oddity here is that each color has four alignment domains, one of which includes shatter, one of which includes desecrate, one of which includes aid, and one of which includes calm emotions. It is not obvious what these 24 domains are named. Ideasmith (talk) 14:34, 25 June 2017 (MDT)

Sure, though that feels a bit too wordy for my liking. --Ghostwheel (talk) 19:03, 25 June 2017 (MDT)