tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post3660703023116151817..comments2024-03-26T15:35:56.004-04:00Comments on Delta's D&D Hotspot: On Alignment & BullshitDeltahttp://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comBlogger12125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-18658082344381136262011-03-04T12:00:31.669-05:002011-03-04T12:00:31.669-05:00Jovial: check out the personality traits in Dwarf ...Jovial: check out the personality traits in Dwarf Fortress. They're basically like the Aristotlian virtues, and you could easily handle them in-game like so: <br /><br />Roll % dice for Bravery. <br /><br />0-25 = Coward<br />26-75 = (Normal)<br />76-100 = Foolhardy<br /><br />There are about two dozen personality trait categories, but because you have a 50% chance to have no special effect you would not list those and so your character would only have a list of about 12. Such a list might look like this: <br /><br />Foolhardy<br />Energetic<br />Altruistic<br />Unassertive<br />Pessimistic<br />Self-Disciplined<br />Modest<br />Disorganized<br /><br />If you tightened the upper and lower bounds, say to 15% on each end, you could get it down below 12 traits. But I think that makes for less-interesting characters. <br /><br />While this personality method is more complete than the nine alignment model, it is definitely too messy for dealing with groups of people. It may be worthwhile to say that a unit of swordmen is Lawful for example and that a tribe of Orcs is Chaotic. This usefulness is the same reason why a game with classes has value that a game based on miscellaneous skills or feats will have trouble offering.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-140242687928773532011-03-03T01:35:17.510-05:002011-03-03T01:35:17.510-05:00Interesting stuff. :-)Interesting stuff. :-)Deltahttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00705402326320853684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-36916531808448777892011-03-02T19:05:35.164-05:002011-03-02T19:05:35.164-05:00This comment has been removed by the author.Unknownhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/10526324326792266677noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-4327775933836710482011-03-02T16:36:38.293-05:002011-03-02T16:36:38.293-05:00Someone, maybe me one day, maybe already beeen don...Someone, maybe me one day, maybe already beeen done, needs to explore alignment from the perspective of Kantian, utilitarian and virtue ethics.<br />I think there may actually be 'real virtue' in Aristotelean virtue ethics and D&D.<br /><br />You can get a taster at http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Virtue_ethics<br /><br />I like how the moral virtues are a mean between two vices. Great role playing opportunities.The Jovial Priesthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00160018433070823408noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-33377583638367716512011-03-02T16:36:37.981-05:002011-03-02T16:36:37.981-05:00Very interesting!
Actually, I’ve known people who...Very interesting!<br /><br />Actually, I’ve known people who I’d say exemplified a “Rules apply to no one, except me” attitude. They held themselves to very high standards but shrugged off almost anything from anyone else. (One guy would always pay you back to the cent if you got him a drink but steadfastly refused to be likewise compensated for a drink he bought you.)<br /><br />Perhaps when push comes to shove they do think at least some rules apply to others, but to describe their general attitude...I think it fits.Roberthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/16733274876782876659noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-58114348936964154032011-03-02T11:52:28.012-05:002011-03-02T11:52:28.012-05:00... and I just realized that's a weird concept...... and I just realized that's a weird concept of a Druid. Must think.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-42031204901223063482011-03-02T11:49:50.183-05:002011-03-02T11:49:50.183-05:00I think it's interesting that of the potential...I think it's interesting that of the potential alignments based on this scheme, only one is what we would consider good for society. Which suggests that alignment in this case is about "doing it right" and then multiple shades of "doing it wrong". <br /><br />Since the ethics of a lion are different from the ethics of a human, I think it's appropriate to say that alignment is alignment from the perspective of humanity. An orc may not consider itself evil, but a human would. What is beneficial and proper to a Red Dragon is often not for a halfling.<br /><br />Humans, Dwarves, Elves, etc. can be non-Lawful of course. These are Anderson's "warlocks who sold out". I consider a Ranger to be Lawful but a Druid is Chaotic for this reason - the former wants to tame the wilderness for civilization or at least to interface with it. The latter wants to tamp down civilization so it doesn't interact with the wilderness.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-12876222956146276522011-03-02T10:13:44.262-05:002011-03-02T10:13:44.262-05:00Yes, very simple yet very provocative.Yes, very simple yet very provocative.Carter Soleshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01286436801953647693noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-39451525503061534692011-03-02T09:39:54.649-05:002011-03-02T09:39:54.649-05:00Very cool. Thanks for this.Very cool. Thanks for this.James Maliszewskihttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00341941102398271464noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-17242623300688516512011-03-02T09:16:49.915-05:002011-03-02T09:16:49.915-05:00That's a really interesting way of looking at ...That's a really interesting way of looking at it. Thanks for posting this... it's got me thinking about Alignment in D&D again.Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13457050225967190052noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-74737741097712787232011-03-02T09:06:56.011-05:002011-03-02T09:06:56.011-05:00Thanks for this! I like the formulation of rules a...Thanks for this! I like the formulation of rules and who they apply to very much.<br /><br />Your fourth possibility, "rules apply to no one, except me" might just be a different way to be Chaotic; makes sense (at least to me) that there'd be multiple approaches to non-Lawful behavior. What do you think?Brian Moonhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/13454291070572658715noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-2170237526012357403.post-38931067957221231512011-03-02T08:58:46.043-05:002011-03-02T08:58:46.043-05:00This is an intriguing line of thought.This is an intriguing line of thought.Jeff Rientshttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17493878980535235896noreply@blogger.com