|
|
|
stranger
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Jan 2023
|
its alright lol i had guessed as much silver 
has thoust forgot thy treefather & nature, or does thoust abandon the treefather for power and gain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
We absolutely need this for it to feel like a DnD game. Larian should also introduce 5e elements like bond and flaw.
Alignment is fun. The alignment grid has become a classic meme and is an essential part of what dungeons and dragons feel like, well, DnD. Just today I saw someone make a grid to mock some esoteric debate about military equipment.
"People will disagree / get angry" isn't a good objection IMO. People engage with / disagree with / get angry about things they care about. So if people are angry about something it means they are invested.
And this isn't just DnD, it the sequel to BG2 and theme of that game was: can you resist the evil inside; the BG plot was all about alignment. The bhaalspawn is born with a soul tainted by evil. Charname needs to decide which wolf to feed - will they embrace and nurture the evil inside or will they nurture their goodness?
Butt kicking for goodness!
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
The first is that I don't think BG3 really needs hard alignment in a story sense. I don't think that having alignment would improve the delivery of the story or its themes. I will insist that Wrath of the Righteous needed alignment because the whole point of the game is about becoming an extra-planar being, something that's more and less than human, and thus is more primal, more elemental, more ruled by these otherworldly ideals. This is speculation about the story but it seems clear from what we've seen so far is that the tadpole is linked to the cult of the absolute in some manner. The tadpole is also linked to the shadow weave which is a creation of / extension of Shar. So while we're ordinary mortals were caught in a 4d chess game being played by gods and thus otherworldly ideals matter.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
I'll paraphrase my response from the other thread referenced Creating a D&D game that was a RPG morality play would be more in line with an absolute alignment, the world in the Bible, and in morality plays, has an alignment that its players are rewarded and punished for acting in. To me though D&D works better as heroic or chivalric tragedies and romances, people should have absolute ideals which make them heroic, and fatal flaws that betray them. How I'd put that into alignment terms, you believe in something, but are not always able to act in those terms. Falling short of that alignment doesn't change your alignment but it should have negative ramifications for your character, eventually you might find you no longer believe in something, possibly because you've come to resent its strictures, at which point your alignment changes. That's not exactly easy to do in a video game, but I think a point system like the Pathfinder games do, isn't a good approximation, 'farming' 100 ravenous goblins to gain +100 points of 'good' shouldn't have an effect on a single much more heinous act that you chose to do for selfish reasons but only amounts to +50 evil points.
This goes out the window when you get extraplanar of course, because alignment is actually material there.
Your alignment should be fixed, your character rewarded or punished for acting in it, and a system of determining your motivations should then inform what your alignment is.
...[not knowing] is interesting too, if alignment still existed but wasn't player facing. Keeping alignment but keeping it hidden from the player is the best in terms of roleplaying. Don't have the world reward or punish actions, otherwise there's only really one alignment which players choose to work against, make everything have believable causes and effects and turn alignment into a way to interpret those events. Unless the story involves extraplanar entities, Deities and the like.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Jhe'stil Kith'rak
|
|
Jhe'stil Kith'rak
Joined: Oct 2021
|
At the very least there needs to be some way the game as a whole responds to your CUMULATIVE decisions, statements, and roleplaying in a HOLISTIC and CONSISTENT manner, as opposed to Larian's usual: You made decision x at point 1, now y is mentioned at point 2, ignoring if you made decisions a, b, and c at every other point.
Either dialogue, or reactivity, or some background way of keeping track.
Remember the human (This is a forum for a video game):
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
I D&D works better as heroic or chivalric tragedies and romances, people should have absolute ideals which make them heroic, and fatal flaws that betray them . . .
Unless the story involves extraplanar entities, Deities and the like. Partially agreed. Tracking ensures that players are taking alignment seriously If you want to play a paladin then good role play should be rewarded - some lawful good, paladin only items should show up -- and bad role play, like poisoning the goblin grog, should be punished. I like that Larian put in oatbreaker but I would like an atonement quest as an option - you can either find a way to atone or accept that you've fallen from grace. And I like the whole mock morality play bit, it's an important part of the genre. Quest of the Avatar was an over the top morality play and both BG1 and DoS2 are filled with Avatar references.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Oct 2020
|
Being Lawful Stupid isn't exactly good roleplay in my book either (my own alignment aside) But I take your meaning, there should be feedback for playing towards and against alignment, but I'd rather it be in the narrative instead of in a system completely separate that is just for tracking, rewarding and punishing it, like in so many other games.
I guess without doing a redux of the "Disappointing Paladins" thread, paladins not being intrinsically tied to an alignment and deity, makes their oaths such a sticking point. It's hard to argue you're in keeping with your oath if an external entity that defines it, decides you've broken it. But in those instances you'll get clear feedback about your actions, whereas someone trying to game the system to be the one Grey Jedi in the universe is making decisions that aren't consistent with a character, but with whatever edge case they're trying to pull off
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Jan 2023
|
The first is that I don't think BG3 really needs hard alignment in a story sense. I don't think that having alignment would improve the delivery of the story or its themes. I will insist that Wrath of the Righteous needed alignment because the whole point of the game is about becoming an extra-planar being, something that's more and less than human, and thus is more primal, more elemental, more ruled by these otherworldly ideals. This is speculation about the story but it seems clear from what we've seen so far is that the tadpole is linked to the cult of the absolute in some manner. The tadpole is also linked to the shadow weave which is a creation of / extension of Shar. So while we're ordinary mortals were caught in a 4d chess game being played by gods and thus otherworldly ideals matter. finally! im glad someone agrees with me!! praise selderine!!
has thoust forgot thy treefather & nature, or does thoust abandon the treefather for power and gain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
finally! im glad someone agrees with me!! praise selderine!! Elistraee smiles on us
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Jan 2023
|
finally! im glad someone agrees with me!! praise selderine!! Elistraee smiles on us yeah i like Elistraee as well.. i like most of the drow deities (excluding lolth as dont like spiders) xD
has thoust forgot thy treefather & nature, or does thoust abandon the treefather for power and gain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Jan 2023
|
finally! im glad someone agrees with me!! praise selderine!! Elistraee smiles on us although being in spider wildshape form really really really comes in handy when dealing with mobs of enemies. just web the whole floor area where the enemies are then fling a fire bolt or fireball at one spot of the web and bam the entire area is on fire
has thoust forgot thy treefather & nature, or does thoust abandon the treefather for power and gain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2019
|
Not only must there be alignment, it must also result in appropriate rewards and punishments in-game. For example, if a society is defined as being generally good and especially lawful, where stealing is considered a crime, then if in-game a player resorts to stealing from people in town and they get caught doing it, or even just bring suspicion upon themselves, there ought to be in-game negative consequences. I utterly disagree with and reject the notion that this amounts to "punishing a player for playing the game their way." Same thing if you have gained a reputation as someone who slaughters people for your material benefit or just for the fun of it. The excuse that 'I want to play the game my way' should not be allowed to dictate the game responding appropriately to such behavior by the player based on the values of the society within which the game is set.
|
|
|
|
|
|
stranger
|
|
OP
stranger
Joined: Jan 2023
|
Not only must there be alignment, it must also result in appropriate rewards and punishments in-game. For example, if a society is defined as being generally good and especially lawful, where stealing is considered a crime, then if in-game a player resorts to stealing from people in town and they get caught doing it, or even just bring suspicion upon themselves, there ought to be in-game negative consequences. I utterly disagree with and reject the notion that this amounts to "punishing a player for playing the game their way." Same thing if you have gained a reputation as someone who slaughters people for your material benefit or just for the fun of it. The excuse that 'I want to play the game my way' should not be allowed to dictate the game responding appropriately to such behavior by the player based on the values of the society within which the game is set. I agree with you Kanisatha, see that is exactly the way i was thinking and saw it when i made those thread post.
has thoust forgot thy treefather & nature, or does thoust abandon the treefather for power and gain.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Aug 2020
|
The game already basically does that, since you do get confronted for killing and stealing, and in most cases if you're caught killing especially, it seems like you may just outright aggro everyone in the surrounding area. So there needs to be polish on the system, but the system is certainly there.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2021
|
Not only must there be alignment, it must also result in appropriate rewards and punishments in-game. For example, if a society is defined as being generally good and especially lawful, where stealing is considered a crime, then if in-game a player resorts to stealing from people in town and they get caught doing it, or even just bring suspicion upon themselves, there ought to be in-game negative consequences. I utterly disagree with and reject the notion that this amounts to "punishing a player for playing the game their way." Same thing if you have gained a reputation as someone who slaughters people for your material benefit or just for the fun of it. The excuse that 'I want to play the game my way' should not be allowed to dictate the game responding appropriately to such behavior by the player based on the values of the society within which the game is set. I want to invite you to consider that You are conflating Alignment and reputation. Alignment is an internal barometer of worldview that determines your ultimate place in the wheel cosmology after death. It can reflect in your actions and it can also change with experiences. There has been a bad trend (Pathfinder) of making actions reflect on changes in alignment, like its some sort of constantly updated actual moral Barometer. It also broadcasts that alignment which is another bad take. 5E - thankfully - has taken the opposite tack - Alignment is not broadcast and its just an internal point of view that can change with experiences and exposure to different things - less actions you take and more based on experiences. Reputation is a totally separate mechanic that should work as you describe. However, a Chaotic, Neutral or Lawful Evil person can have a good reputation - especially if it suits their needs in the long or short term.
Blackheifer
|
|
|
|
|
|
member
|
|
member
Joined: Sep 2021
|
I like it the way it is now.
I do have some idea of my character values and alignment but that can not explain all of its personality. There is no need for forced alignment choices especially when alignment does not really play a big role in 5e. That being said, your choices do matter and lead to all kind of consequences. This is good but it is a completely different kind of thing.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2020
|
I want to invite you to consider that You are conflating Alignment and reputation. That's the way that alignment was implemented in BG so that's understandable. Alignment is an internal barometer of worldview that determines your ultimate place in the wheel cosmology after death. It can reflect in your actions and it can also change with experiences. That's not innacurate but it's a flaw with 5e -- one of the reasons I'm warming up to Pathfinder. Don't get me wrong, 5e is still the best edition since 2nd but 5e's downplaying of alignment is one of its major flaws.
|
|
|
|
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
|
|
Volunteer Moderator
Joined: Feb 2022
|
I want to invite you to consider that You are conflating Alignment and reputation. That's the way that alignment was implemented in BG so that's understandable. Well, iirc if you started out with an evil alignment in the original games then you got a penalty to your reputation, or a bonus if you started with a good alignment, but the reputation score was nevertheless managed separately from alignment from that point on, being impacted by quest completion, murderous actions or bribes at temples. A single number was still a very broad brush way of handling reputation, and if Larian want to do something similar but a bit more sophisticated then it feels as though they have the raw material in the form of their attitude mechanic. Not a whole lot is done with that yet, but it could be. But while I think there might be a way to better use attitude to reflect opinions of our party, what I think really makes it feel as though our choices have consequences is NPCs having specific content related to actions of our party that they could be expected to know and care about, unmediated by things like alignment or reputation scores.
"You may call it 'nonsense' if you like, but I've heard nonsense, compared with which that would be as sensible as a dictionary!"
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: May 2019
|
The game already basically does that, since you do get confronted for killing and stealing, and in most cases if you're caught killing especially, it seems like you may just outright aggro everyone in the surrounding area. So there needs to be polish on the system, but the system is certainly there. Well that is good to know. Not only must there be alignment, it must also result in appropriate rewards and punishments in-game. For example, if a society is defined as being generally good and especially lawful, where stealing is considered a crime, then if in-game a player resorts to stealing from people in town and they get caught doing it, or even just bring suspicion upon themselves, there ought to be in-game negative consequences. I utterly disagree with and reject the notion that this amounts to "punishing a player for playing the game their way." Same thing if you have gained a reputation as someone who slaughters people for your material benefit or just for the fun of it. The excuse that 'I want to play the game my way' should not be allowed to dictate the game responding appropriately to such behavior by the player based on the values of the society within which the game is set. I want to invite you to consider that You are conflating Alignment and reputation. Alignment is an internal barometer of worldview that determines your ultimate place in the wheel cosmology after death. It can reflect in your actions and it can also change with experiences. There has been a bad trend (Pathfinder) of making actions reflect on changes in alignment, like its some sort of constantly updated actual moral Barometer. It also broadcasts that alignment which is another bad take. 5E - thankfully - has taken the opposite tack - Alignment is not broadcast and its just an internal point of view that can change with experiences and exposure to different things - less actions you take and more based on experiences. Reputation is a totally separate mechanic that should work as you describe. However, a Chaotic, Neutral or Lawful Evil person can have a good reputation - especially if it suits their needs in the long or short term. Yes I generally agree with you on this. But ... A person's reputation is determined by their behavior, which in turn may or may not be determined by their alignment. However, if a player is truely and honestly roleplaying their character based on their character's alignment, AND alignment has been accurately defined within the game's mechanics, then alignment SHOULD reflect behavior.
|
|
|
|
|
|
veteran
|
|
veteran
Joined: Mar 2021
|
The game already basically does that, since you do get confronted for killing and stealing, and in most cases if you're caught killing especially, it seems like you may just outright aggro everyone in the surrounding area. So there needs to be polish on the system, but the system is certainly there. Well that is good to know. Not only must there be alignment, it must also result in appropriate rewards and punishments in-game. For example, if a society is defined as being generally good and especially lawful, where stealing is considered a crime, then if in-game a player resorts to stealing from people in town and they get caught doing it, or even just bring suspicion upon themselves, there ought to be in-game negative consequences. I utterly disagree with and reject the notion that this amounts to "punishing a player for playing the game their way." Same thing if you have gained a reputation as someone who slaughters people for your material benefit or just for the fun of it. The excuse that 'I want to play the game my way' should not be allowed to dictate the game responding appropriately to such behavior by the player based on the values of the society within which the game is set. I want to invite you to consider that You are conflating Alignment and reputation. Alignment is an internal barometer of worldview that determines your ultimate place in the wheel cosmology after death. It can reflect in your actions and it can also change with experiences. There has been a bad trend (Pathfinder) of making actions reflect on changes in alignment, like its some sort of constantly updated actual moral Barometer. It also broadcasts that alignment which is another bad take. 5E - thankfully - has taken the opposite tack - Alignment is not broadcast and its just an internal point of view that can change with experiences and exposure to different things - less actions you take and more based on experiences. Reputation is a totally separate mechanic that should work as you describe. However, a Chaotic, Neutral or Lawful Evil person can have a good reputation - especially if it suits their needs in the long or short term. Yes I generally agree with you on this. But ... A person's reputation is determined by their behavior, which in turn may or may not be determined by their alignment. However, if a player is truely and honestly roleplaying their character based on their character's alignment, AND alignment has been accurately defined within the game's mechanics, then alignment SHOULD reflect behavior. I don't disagree with this, but..let me give you an example of how Bg1 and 2 screwed this up badly. In Bg1 and 2 if you had evil party members they would EXPECT you to have a bad reputations. If you failed to maintain at least a Neutral or Lower reputation they would leave. Having a Neutral or Lower reputation would affect your ability to but and sell goods, what prices you would get, and if you had a low enough reputation the guards would chase you and you couldn't really buy or sell, or interact with anyone in town. None of this makes any sense. Just because a player is NE - doesn't mean they don't want to have a good reputation and be able to go to town and enjoy creature comforts. In fact, a lot of their behavior is around the idea of personal wealth and comfort which you can't have if you are hated. It made no sense, compounded by the fact that Sarevok, who was Chaotic Evil, had a really GOOD reputation for the majority of the game. Also I am against being able to actually SEE a persons alignment. It takes the fun out of trying to get to know a person.
Blackheifer
|
|
|
|
|
