I recently come to the conclusion that I have no idea what other people are doing with Dungeons & Dragons anymore. Now I want to point out before we start pointing fingers here that I'm not some reactionary: I did previously know what people were doing with dungeons and dragons (mediocre bullshit) and it brought me no joy. So initially this wasn't a cause for panic. But we've wandered into some strange territory here folks.
Behold the new alignment chart, earnestly proposed by D&D 5e players on that bastion of high-level thought, Twitter:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4208[/ATTACH]
What is happening at your table? Like whenever you crack open the player's handbook and the GM is pitching you the game world and your role as a character what you're going to be doing like what the fuck are they saying? Are they referring to Dragonborn as "scaly bois"? Like is there no line between you just sitting in a room and eating snacks with your friends and what's happening in the game's universe at all?
What gets under my skin about this chart is that I saw in a post where someone was hell-bent on implementing it in their game in lieu of the alignment system. Hell. Bent. To me it paints a picture of a game where all the characters are pure comedic id-impulse caricatures. Paladins pledging themselves to Doritos and such like.
The very notion of something being "good" or "evil" and that compelling action from them is alien to these people. Objectionable, even.
Granted, I do think the Temple of Elemental Horniness might be pretty funny. You could have it built by the Cult of the Incels.
I don't know if I prefer turgid, uninteresting mayonnaise fantasy over the current Adventure Time-y, lolrandom tumblr humor. Really, i'm just frustrated that this is what people do with this game. If you possessed the capacity for abstract thought, I would tell you to be ashamed of yourselves. As it stands, when I encounter you, I will simply swat you with a rolled-up newspaper.
...
I posted this to invite a few different avenues of discussions:
1) An explanation. Your group plays this way and you're the sharing, caring, care-bears type of person who wants to gush about it. Motherfucker, feel free. It's a train wreck to to me but god dammed if I don't want to slow down and soak it in while I drive by
2) "Those people suck because-" or the "Pundit's Choice awards" as I think of them. Share your baffling gems of experience with this new, even stupider wave of gamers.
3) More ideas rivaling "Elemental Temple of Horniness": I'm talking about fucking Sadboi demons and Paladin subclasses based on being Stressed with caffeine-based magic here. There is gold in this chart and we'll mine it yet.
4) Yeah you can stow the whole "You shouldn't judge how other people enjoy the gaaaaaaame" I've fucking heard it, ok? I'm being rude on purpose you assclown.
Quote from: Azraele;1124241Behold the new alignment chart, earnestly proposed by D&D 5e players on that bastion of high-level thought, Twitter
Stupid people on stupid platforms say stupid shit, news at 11.
Everyone wants to be funny. I'm the perma GM of my group of 30+ years. Over the past few years we added some of our kids to our games and since we are a Friends & Family group, we try to teach the younger generation on how not to be too disruptive towards others while playing We are trying to play a more serious (as serious as elf, magic and dragons can be) game while the the kids are just trying do anything that is funny. I've stated that maybe they shouldn't play if they are just wanting to be disruptive. As time passed most of them gotten it out of their system and they went off collage except for one who still just wants to be funny. I think he's just board and is not sure if he wants to be here or not. Either way as far as the over all group make up goes I do not count him as a party member when I make encounters because he's always just trying to be funny and not at all helpful during combat ;)
So as the GM of the group, I tend to let them play as they will but I will not let them TPK the group based on their actions alone. The rest of the group sees them as the harmless crazy uncle doing their batshit hijinks in the background while combat is happening. If I was a player and the group was full of this type of players I would find another group because even when I was 13 eons ago my group did some silly things but it was more along the lines of: Most of the group started to take over the local prostitution guilds by offering better healing services and let them keep most of their coin which pissed off the local prostitution guilds that controlled that part of the city which started a huge guild war that the players eventually won against the guilds but when the might of the City guards was called in they had to flee the city. The Rulers of the city took action after the guild wars started to impact several Merchant guilds so in the end they helped the city by removing the local bandits that the City Guards were unable or unwilling to do because a lot of them were on the take...... What did my players at the tender age of 13 learn way back then? Just like in real life, in my games there are always consequences to your actions. Always :)
Quote from: Krugus;1124249Snop Snop
I really enjoyed reading this reply. Also, a campaign that spiraled out of such wonderfully inane shenanigans as improving local prostitute working conditions sounds delightful.
I don't remember which blog I read, but it was pretty clever about stating how the default mode for RPG was absurdist comedy. Improv in entertainment works best for comedy, absurdist comedy (it's much harder to have Improv produce something like Westworld or True Detective season 1). And RPG is a lot of improv. Combine that with the fact that it's natural to break tension with comedy. One of the reasons you have GM with some control, who can enforce rules and consequences, is that without that even the best intentioned group that wants a serious game will devolve into absurdist comedy.
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1124265I don't remember which blog I read, but it was pretty clever about stating how the default mode for RPG was absurdist comedy. Improv in entertainment works best for comedy, absurdist comedy (it's much harder to have Improv produce something like Westworld or True Detective season 1). And RPG is a lot of improv. Combine that with the fact that it's natural to break tension with comedy. One of the reasons you have GM with some control, who can enforce rules and consequences, is that without that even the best intentioned group that wants a serious game will devolve into absurdist comedy.
You're on to something there, Pencilboy. But I don't object to a game devolving into comedy; I object to a parody of a parody.
Look, if you start out in a place of Taking Things Seriously, with your Minas Tiriths and your Smaugs and your Balrogs, it's funny when the Dwarf upends a latrine on Sauroman's head or the fellowship gets caught taking turns with the elf behind Elrond's shed. But if it's clownshoes from the first note, there's nothing sufficiently stuffy and pompous for the players to properly ridicule. The Song of Nacho Fries is already in the Snack Cleric's spell list, what's left to mock? You're ironically forced to commit to comedy at face value, which removes the most vital element of a joke; it's unpredictability.
(I'll give some breathing room here for the nebulously defined "Gonzo" genre, which I guess
does sincerely commit to the absurdity of it's kooky premise and rules. But it feels in a different spirit to what I'm elaborating here)
Temple of Elemental Horniness sounds like something that'd be right at home in Uresia. I imagine Satyrs and Satyresses offering all sorts of ... interesting ... services. Especially for the "Horngry" aligned.
But, yeah, these people don't want to look at anything or anyone through the lens of good or evil. It would mean potentially being confronted with the possibility of deep introspection and coming to terms where they stand with their own morality and/or life choices. Far easier and infinitely more convenient to just say everything is relative unless you're a conservative - in which case, of course, you're a fucking no good Nazi.
And, yes, I am suggesting that the very kind of people who'd seriously try to make an alignment system from the chart above are the same ones hanging out on TBP, who themselves have become a parody of a parody.
Back to the Temple of Elemental Horniness. I can see a Temple of Horniness for sure. But Temple of Elemental Horniness? It boggles the imagination, I tell you! Boggles!
double post
"hOw DaRe YoU gAtEkEeP!" - the people who created this...thing...(probably)
The thing I've found about Players who have appointed themselves the group's Jester, is that most of them do not have a decent enough sense of comedy to pull it off without being annoying.
I really think that either the OP was trolled into believing that those proposing this thing were serious or the OP is trolling us or I'm in a mirror universe and have forgotten to grow out my goatee.
Quote from: jeff37923;1124275The thing I've found about Players who have appointed themselves the group's Jester, is that most of them do not have a decent enough sense of comedy to pull it off without being annoying.
This matches my experience.
Meanwhile on #Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/RPGdesign/comments/fi2jcm/mod_policy_on_the_use_of_ableist_language/)
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1124265I don't remember which blog I read, but it was pretty clever about stating how the default mode for RPG was absurdist comedy.
Which explains why the community
itself resembles absurdist comedy.
Quote from: Anon Adderlan;1124280Meanwhile on #Reddit (https://www.reddit.com/r/RPGdesign/comments/fi2jcm/mod_policy_on_the_use_of_ableist_language/)
I believe I covered that one, but it bears repeating:
Quote from: GnomeWorks;1124246Stupid people on stupid platforms say stupid shit, news at 11.
Quote from: Azraele;1124241Behold the new alignment chart, earnestly proposed by D&D 5e players on that bastion of high-level thought, Twitter:
I can not figure out how coffee applies to the new alignment chart and it is making me either Cangry or Cungry
Quote from: jeff37923;1124275The thing I've found about Players who have appointed themselves the group's Jester, is that most of them do not have a decent enough sense of comedy to pull it off without being annoying.
30% of people dont have a sense of humour and I dont know enough about which one it applies to.
Quote from: Shasarak;1124282I can not figure out how coffee applies to the new alignment chart and it is making me either Cangry or Cungry
Coffee is elementally aligned to Stress. Hence the holy Stress-relic, Decanter of Endless Espresso (imbibe at your own risk).
Reddit has always been a dumpster fire too, really. So no surprises there.
Terrible alignment chart for D&D. Absolutely brilliant chart of Stresses for many flavors of Cortex Plus/Prime Dramatic games!
I cannot see the chart on this device. :( However, given the discussion it might be divine providence all things considered. Seems like you gazed upon mythos levels of badwrongfun. :p
A Paladin who pledges themselves to Doritos is hilarious, but it's not D&D to me.
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1124265Improv in entertainment works best for comedy, absurdist comedy (it's much harder to have Improv produce something like Westworld or True Detective season 1).
But one of the first things we learned in improv class was not to try to be funny... that the comedy that emerges from playing it straight will always be funnier. So the silliest, funniest stuff I've seen happen in RPGs were always in-character and followed out of plausible in-game events. No rubber chickens were necessary.
KRUGUS!!! Welcome aboard! We're the Mos Eisley of the RPG world. Looking forward to hearing more about your campaigns and RPGing interests!
As for Absurd RPGs, I am cool with that as a rare one-shot or short campaign. It's like Paranoia where its all about indulging in the super-silliness and acting like Goobers in Gooberworld. But that's not how I want to play 95% of the time.
Quote from: Azraele;1124285Coffee is elementally aligned to Stress. Hence the holy Stress-relic, Decanter of Endless Espresso (imbibe at your own risk).
1) Coffee is elementally aligned with Power (Cult of the Brown Serpent), or Productivity (Church of Keytappers)
2) Anyone that would make a magic-item of decanted espresso is an agent of demonic forces and must be purified (i.e. slain with extreme prejudice).
As for the OP - I have no dealings with D&D or the general populace that thrives under the banner of 5e's assumed "game" (whatever that is). I've found that what D&D has become is very different than what I run (Swashbuckling/S&S style sandbox normally) that most modern gamers seem to find what I do "too hardcore" - but that might have to do with the comedic-absurdism thing. Not to mention the conceits of what people today think of as "D&D" has gotten fucking ***weird*** to me, and the people that drink that Kool-Aid likewise are weird.
And that's saying a *lot* because I'm pretty fucking weird.
This looks like the sort of thing that would've been worth a Sensible Chuckle if it popped up in the humor section of Dragon Magazine. Take it seriously though? Nah brah, this ain't Toon or Paranoia.
Sometimes, people forget that in many mid-to-high fantasy games, 'good' and 'evil' aren't just labels. Heck, in D&D proper (and in PF and other bastard children), Good and Evil are tangible forces, as real as gravity, magnetism, and the tendency for buttered toast to land butter side down.
Quote from: Spinachcat;1124312KRUGUS!!! Welcome aboard! We're the Mos Eisley of the RPG world. Looking forward to hearing more about your campaigns and RPGing interests!
As for Absurd RPGs, I am cool with that as a rare one-shot or short campaign. It's like Paranoia where its all about indulging in the super-silliness and acting like Goobers in Gooberworld. But that's not how I want to play 95% of the time.
Thanks Spinachcat. I've been a lurker for a while so I thought I would finally create an account and step out of the shadows :)
I don't think this site is a "wretched hive of scum and villainy." I've lurked a while to know :p
As to the subject at hand, humor is always best when its not forced. Natural absurdities are always the way to go ;)
Did anyone play Gary Gygax's Dungeonland and The Land Beyond the Magic Mirror? TSR modules EX1 and EX2?
Back in the day, our teen crew would NOT touch them. The concept of non-super cereal D&D was a no-no (thus explaining how we jumped hardcore into Warhammer Fantasy). I don't know why exactly, especially because we played a fuckton of Toon and later, Paranoia.
I wonder if a funny and/or absurdist 5e adventure would have an audience?
And what's double weird in retrospect is how we were totally kewlio with hysterical things happening in actual play, but totally not-kewlio with Dungeonland or other jokey D&D publications.
Quote from: HappyDaze;1124277I really think that either the OP was trolled into believing that those proposing this thing were serious or the OP is trolling us or I'm in a mirror universe and have forgotten to grow out my goatee.
Something like that. If there's a point it's lost in the bizarre whathefuckery.
Quote from: Azraele;1124241I recently come to the conclusion that I have no idea what other people are doing with Dungeons & Dragons anymore. Now I want to point out before we start pointing fingers here that I'm not some reactionary: I did previously know what people were doing with dungeons and dragons (mediocre bullshit) and it brought me no joy. So initially this wasn't a cause for panic. But we've wandered into some strange territory here folks.
Behold the new alignment chart, earnestly proposed by D&D 5e players on that bastion of high-level thought, Twitter:
[ATTACH=CONFIG]4208[/ATTACH]
What is happening at your table? Like whenever you crack open the player's handbook and the GM is pitching you the game world and your role as a character what you're going to be doing like what the fuck are they saying? Are they referring to Dragonborn as "scaly bois"? Like is there no line between you just sitting in a room and eating snacks with your friends and what's happening in the game's universe at all?
What gets under my skin about this chart is that I saw in a post where someone was hell-bent on implementing it in their game in lieu of the alignment system. Hell. Bent. To me it paints a picture of a game where all the characters are pure comedic id-impulse caricatures. Paladins pledging themselves to Doritos and such like.
The very notion of something being "good" or "evil" and that compelling action from them is alien to these people. Objectionable, even.
Granted, I do think the Temple of Elemental Horniness might be pretty funny. You could have it built by the Cult of the Incels.
I don't know if I prefer turgid, uninteresting mayonnaise fantasy over the current Adventure Time-y, lolrandom tumblr humor. Really, i'm just frustrated that this is what people do with this game. If you possessed the capacity for abstract thought, I would tell you to be ashamed of yourselves. As it stands, when I encounter you, I will simply swat you with a rolled-up newspaper.
...
I posted this to invite a few different avenues of discussions:
1) An explanation. Your group plays this way and you're the sharing, caring, care-bears type of person who wants to gush about it. Motherfucker, feel free. It's a train wreck to to me but god dammed if I don't want to slow down and soak it in while I drive by
2) "Those people suck because-" or the "Pundit's Choice awards" as I think of them. Share your baffling gems of experience with this new, even stupider wave of gamers.
3) More ideas rivaling "Elemental Temple of Horniness": I'm talking about fucking Sadboi demons and Paladin subclasses based on being Stressed with caffeine-based magic here. There is gold in this chart and we'll mine it yet.
4) Yeah you can stow the whole "You shouldn't judge how other people enjoy the gaaaaaaame" I've fucking heard it, ok? I'm being rude on purpose you assclown.
thats one confusing ass chart bro. since i only do D6 now i don't have to worry about alignment, i only need to know if something is evil or not, greatly simplifies things.
I don't frequent lolrandom land.
I find the fantasy genre stagnant and arbitrary, and by extension most gaming settings. However, I address that by reexaminations of world building.
Like, nine-point alignment is inherently nonsensical to me. So I go back to Moorcock's works and adopt three-point alignment. This gives me more freedom in designing stuff.
I don't adopt "bacon" and "necktie" as alignments unless I'm trying to explain inter-chaos politics.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1124734Like, nine-point alignment is inherently nonsensical to me. So I go back to Moorcock's works and adopt three-point alignment. This gives me more freedom in designing stuff.
It is interesting that you choose the Law-Chaos axis. Personally I find the Good-Evil axis to be the least arbitary (excepting bacon of course).
Quote from: Shasarak;1124739It is interesting that you choose the Law-Chaos axis. Personally I find the Good-Evil axis to be the least arbitary (excepting bacon of course).
Good/Evil is the most arbitrary because human morality varies dramatically across time and space. For most of our history we considered genocide and slavery as morally good.
Also, as the TV show Charmed demonstrated at length, a balance between Good/Evil is a fundamentally stupid idea.
Law/Chaos has a far stronger foundation in world mythology. The Stormbringer universe got tons of mileage out of it.
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1124265I don't remember which blog I read, but it was pretty clever about stating how the default mode for RPG was absurdist comedy. Improv in entertainment works best for comedy, absurdist comedy (it's much harder to have Improv produce something like Westworld or True Detective season 1). And RPG is a lot of improv. Combine that with the fact that it's natural to break tension with comedy. One of the reasons you have GM with some control, who can enforce rules and consequences, is that without that even the best intentioned group that wants a serious game will devolve into absurdist comedy.
D&D at its best is absurdist Marx Brothers craziness and I love the comedy of the game. I remember DMing for some kids once and they were being chased by ghouls so the fighter threw caltrops on the ground and the wizard cast grease on the ground so the ghouls slipped and fell on the caltrops. Then they lit the grease on fire and kept on knocking the ghouls down with ten foot poles whenever they tried to get up. Kids were laughing so hard they almost couldn't breathe. Was one of my proudest moments as DM.
Forced lolrandom comedy doesn't really help with that, just distracts from the stuff that's really hilarious about D&D. Generally the hilarity emerges naturally from the game, you just have to be flexible enough to allow for the kind in intelligent tactics that result in crazy hijinks and provide interesting environments for the PCs to interact with. Stupid shit like puns that refer to real world stuff on the other hand are stupid and generally not funny at all. What should be funny is that the situation in game is hilarious.
Quote from: Daztur;1124923D&D at its best is absurdist Marx Brothers craziness and I love the comedy of the game. I remember DMing for some kids once and they were being chased by ghouls so the fighter threw caltrops on the ground and the wizard cast grease on the ground so the ghouls slipped and fell on the caltrops. Then they lit the grease on fire and kept on knocking the ghouls down with ten foot poles whenever they tried to get up. Kids were laughing so hard they almost couldn't breathe. Was one of my proudest moments as DM.
Forced lolrandom comedy doesn't really help with that, just distracts from the stuff that's really hilarious about D&D. Generally the hilarity emerges naturally from the game, you just have to be flexible enough to allow for the kind in intelligent tactics that result in crazy hijinks and provide interesting environments for the PCs to interact with. Stupid shit like puns that refer to real world stuff on the other hand are stupid and generally not funny at all. What should be funny is that the situation in game is hilarious.
*scribbles notes furiously* You know, I don't think any rulebook states one way or the other if grease is flammable (duration may vary, though -- back in 1E it was permanent. Yikes).
Awesome tactic though. :)
Quote from: PencilBoy99;1124265I don't remember which blog I read, but it was pretty clever about stating how the default mode for RPG was absurdist comedy. Improv in entertainment works best for comedy, absurdist comedy (it's much harder to have Improv produce something like Westworld or True Detective season 1). And RPG is a lot of improv. Combine that with the fact that it's natural to break tension with comedy. One of the reasons you have GM with some control, who can enforce rules and consequences, is that without that even the best intentioned group that wants a serious game will devolve into absurdist comedy.
And that's why I prefer running text-only games. I know "N-N-NARRATIVE GAMES?!" is seen as blasphemy here, but when it comes to running something that tries to consistently keep as straight a face as possible then it's the only way to pull it off long-term I've found. I run games IRL as well, but there's inevitably an undercurrent of... well I hate to say self-awareness, but even in the more serious games I've run, the humour starts flowing between us when an especially bad roll hits, or an amusing response pops up (even if we laugh about it but then play the response pretty straight). I enjoy both games but I'm not going to pretend we'll be getting True Detective S1 face-to-face or via voice chat.
Lolsorandom quirky, absurdist attempts at constantly being funny have always been part of the hobby, but whilst I don't want to sound like Old Man Yells At Twitter some more, I definitely roll my eyes at most of the "Yeah that chain of events definitely happened" stories that're propagated and even more so when the usual suspects are trying to get people to like their whacky new subversive OC. I think a lot of it comes from people still being very self-conscious that they're playing D&D, that dorky game for the basement dwelling geeks they decided to try, but are also very critical of associating themselves with that group.
By turning everything and anything into one extended slapstick joke - no matter how tiresome or repetitive - they're putting up a sign to say, "I'm not some dumb nerd pretending to be a Holy Paladin of Ilmater, I'm just having fun being some dumb, quirky jester-bard who's like totally random and whacky and doesn't care about anything! I'm not one of those dumb nerds who takes it seriously I'm just here to have fun, haha."
It's true that the less one tries to be witty, the more witty their occasional attempts will be perceived. Maybe this is nothing more than self-filtering out the borderline stuff, making the things that make it through the filter more witty by comparison. Or maybe it is knowing the right time and place. I know I've picked up a rep for wit sometimes in social circles where I'm on the fringe and don't say much, but it never happens in groups where I'm there all the time. (And the things I said that got me that rep didn't sound all that witty to me at the time.)
That said, my main group is almost entirely made up of people that can sometimes go on a tear. When they start to feed off of each other, it's magical. That can be totally OOC context, entirely in character, or some mix. Even with a mostly or totally OOC context, I wouldn't dream of derailing it when it happens. Way I see it, that's effectively a mental break, even if an unplanned one. It runs; it stops; everyone manages to catch their breathe from laughing so hard; we get back to game refreshed and happy. It only goes that perfectly every third or fourth session, but I'll let something rip once or twice every (8-hour) session just in case it's one of the magical ones.
Quote from: Steven Mitchell;1124934It's true that the less one tries to be witty, the more witty their occasional attempts will be perceived. Maybe this is nothing more than self-filtering out the borderline stuff, making the things that make it through the filter more witty by comparison. Or maybe it is knowing the right time and place. I know I've picked up a rep for wit sometimes in social circles where I'm on the fringe and don't say much, but it never happens in groups where I'm there all the time. (And the things I said that got me that rep didn't sound all that witty to me at the time.)
That said, my main group is almost entirely made up of people that can sometimes go on a tear. When they start to feed off of each other, it's magical. That can be totally OOC context, entirely in character, or some mix. Even with a mostly or totally OOC context, I wouldn't dream of derailing it when it happens. Way I see it, that's effectively a mental break, even if an unplanned one. It runs; it stops; everyone manages to catch their breathe from laughing so hard; we get back to game refreshed and happy. It only goes that perfectly every third or fourth session, but I'll let something rip once or twice every (8-hour) session just in case it's one of the magical ones.
Steve buddy, you need to record that shit and put it on Youtube to maximize the social good.
Quote from: Snark Knight;1124931Lolsorandom quirky, absurdist attempts at constantly being funny have always been part of the hobby, but whilst I don't want to sound like Old Man Yells At Twitter some more, I definitely roll my eyes at most of the "Yeah that chain of events definitely happened" stories that're propagated and even more so when the usual suspects are trying to get people to like their whacky new subversive OC. I think a lot of it comes from people still being very self-conscious that they're playing D&D, that dorky game for the basement dwelling geeks they decided to try, but are also very critical of associating themselves with that group.
By turning everything and anything into one extended slapstick joke - no matter how tiresome or repetitive - they're putting up a sign to say, "I'm not some dumb nerd pretending to be a Holy Paladin of Ilmater, I'm just having fun being some dumb, quirky jester-bard who's like totally random and whacky and doesn't care about anything! I'm not one of those dumb nerds who takes it seriously I'm just here to have fun, haha."
Is.... Is
that why they do it? I always thought it was desperately unsocial, unfunny people trying to tell an ever-less-believable lie in a desperate gambit to get people to pay attention to them. It's seems like something a certain caste of socially awkward nerd would do (essentially the opposite case to the previous example).
Alignment debates are routine and you can find 'official positions' on any action as lawful or chaotic or good or evil. There was just a recent discussion of how in the Al-Qadim boxed set, the Lawful Good rulers use slavery. Lampooning alignment is easy to do, and that's what this is - not much of an effort to shoehorn it into a game.
As far as 'clown-shoes', there is a campaign that I'm a player in that lampoons the tropes of a standard fantasy campaign. We refer to it as the 'spoofantasy' campaign. It's like Police Academy/Naked Gun - you play the situations more or less straight but you make fun of the tropes.
Quote from: deadDMwalking;1124950There was just a recent discussion of how in the Al-Qadim boxed set, the Lawful Good rulers use slavery.
The apologetics in that thread with the whole "oh but it's not as bad as slavery elsewhere because it's reflective of how Islam tries to make the practice humane" can absolutely suck my ass.
Slavery is fucking evil, full stop. I don't give a shit if it's Westerners doing it or Muslims. If your culture engages in slavery and says it is okay on any level,
it can go fuck itself.
Quote from: GnomeWorks;1125119The apologetics in that thread with the whole "oh but it's not as bad as slavery elsewhere because it's reflective of how Islam tries to make the practice humane" can absolutely suck my ass.
Slavery is fucking evil, full stop. I don't give a shit if it's Westerners doing it or Muslims. If your culture engages in slavery and says it is okay on any level, it can go fuck itself.
This is why I prefer the single Law/Chaos axis. You can have a society that practices slavery without it pinging detect evil all the time and forcing the party paladin to become Daenerys Targaryen.
The only way you can have humane slavery is by incorporating people, a la The Unincorporated Man or Jennifer Government. I'm surprised that policy isn't widely featured in cyberpunk fiction AFAIK.
Quote from: GnomeWorks;1125119The apologetics in that thread with the whole "oh but it's not as bad as slavery elsewhere because it's reflective of how Islam tries to make the practice humane" can absolutely suck my ass.
Slavery is fucking evil, full stop. I don't give a shit if it's Westerners doing it or Muslims. If your culture engages in slavery and says it is okay on any level, it can go fuck itself.
Quote from: BoxCrayonTales;1125131This is why I prefer the single Law/Chaos axis. You can have a society that practices slavery without it pinging detect evil all the time and forcing the party paladin to become Daenerys Targaryen.
The only way you can have humane slavery is by incorporating people, a la The Unincorporated Man or Jennifer Government. I'm surprised that policy isn't widely featured in cyberpunk fiction AFAIK.
OKAY you two: This stupid Horngry thread is
NOT GOING TO BE ABOUT THE ETHICS OF SLAVERY. FUCK OFF WITH THAT DISCUSSION TO YOUR OWN DOOMED THREAD.That is all. Back to our regularly scheduled dumb nonsense.
Quote from: Azraele;1125133OKAY you two: This stupid Horngry thread is NOT GOING TO BE ABOUT THE ETHICS OF SLAVERY. FUCK OFF WITH THAT DISCUSSION TO YOUR OWN DOOMED THREAD.
That is all. Back to our regularly scheduled dumb nonsense.
Slavery is unethical. End of discussion.
I find even the nine default Alignments almost comical. Like something you would find the works of Forgotten Realms in-setting book of some scholar as he attempts to find order among the universe. I think Alignment (or the lack thereof) is really a personal thing that should fluctuate from table to table. That being said, I cannot even fathom how to understand that diagram from the original post. Like, are you suppose to just act based on the combinations of "status"? And essentially be a cardboard, one-dimensional character?It feels that way. But it almost feels like parody. I almost expect it to be something from the Knights of the Dinner Table comic strips.
Personally I use the Law/Neutral/Chaos scheme. Simple yet elegant. It has a strong foundation in older fantasy works. And to be quite honest, I loved Matt Colville's explanation of Law vs Chaos.
Guys, make sure you stick to the topic.
Quote from: Eldritch_Knight;1125147I think Alignment (or the lack thereof) is really a personal thing that should fluctuate from table to table.
It mostly does, really. I find the more experienced gamers tend not to pay much attention to it, so long as your character is behaving consistently they're good with it.
Quote from: Kyle Aaron;1125168It mostly does, really. I find the more experienced gamers tend not to pay much attention to it, so long as your character is behaving consistently they're good with it.
This is a good point: as far as I can tell, the original impetus for Alignment as a mechanically-supported rule was so that Gygax could punish people for playing against archetype. It was essentially a codifying of behavioral expectations, but messier than later jabs at the same thing (actually, I feel like the insanity mechanics in CoC were much cleaner in this regard, although they weren't quite the same).
Is ANY alignment system more sensible, workable, than the nonsense I posted above?
Really, that nightmare polyhedron up there isn't any less intuitive than whatever the fuck "Chaotic Neutral" is meant to imply. Or "Neutral Evil"
(Man, game designers get too caught up in symmetry and create some stupid shit as a result...)
I've been using Law-Neutral-Chaos, but even that doesn't really need "Neutral" now, does it? It's basically white hats and black hats, but even that isn't defined mechanically; it's more something implied by the religions and cults and codes of chivalry that the setting has, whatever I make them. That organic approach serves the same function; I really only need alignment for magic weapons, when that's appropriate. And those weapons are so rare that I could probably do away with alignment entirely and just have each one have it's own code and expectations, which strikes me as more flavorful and interesting.
Damn, I think alignment just sucks. Unexpected realization there.
Quote from: Azraele;1125226This is a good point: as far as I can tell, the original impetus for Alignment as a mechanically-supported rule was so that Gygax could punish people for playing against archetype.
Naw. Originally it was just a way of telling the shirts from the skins in Chainmail Fantasy.
Quote from: Azraele;1125226Is ANY alignment system more sensible, workable, than the nonsense I posted above?
Fantasy Craft. Alignments are an optional feature that falls under Interests(which also include languages and areas of study). If you play in a setting where things like good and evil are fundamental forces(like Forgotten Realms with its positive and negative energy planes, frex), you could pick D&D style alignments. But in general, alignment, if it's even important enough to the character to bother with, will be more specific than that. Like a specific religion, code of conduct, something like that. But again, optional at multiple levels.
Quote from: Azraele;1125226This is a good point: as far as I can tell, the original impetus for Alignment as a mechanically-supported rule was so that Gygax could punish people for playing against archetype. It was essentially a codifying of behavioral expectations, but messier than later jabs at the same thing (actually, I feel like the insanity mechanics in CoC were much cleaner in this regard, although they weren't quite the same).
Is ANY alignment system more sensible, workable, than the nonsense I posted above?
Really, that nightmare polyhedron up there isn't any less intuitive than whatever the fuck "Chaotic Neutral" is meant to imply. Or "Neutral Evil"
(Man, game designers get too caught up in symmetry and create some stupid shit as a result...)
I've been using Law-Neutral-Chaos, but even that doesn't really need "Neutral" now, does it? It's basically white hats and black hats, but even that isn't defined mechanically; it's more something implied by the religions and cults and codes of chivalry that the setting has, whatever I make them. That organic approach serves the same function; I really only need alignment for magic weapons, when that's appropriate. And those weapons are so rare that I could probably do away with alignment entirely and just have each one have it's own code and expectations, which strikes me as more flavorful and interesting.
Damn, I think alignment just sucks. Unexpected realization there.
I hate Palladium game rules, but one of the things that I think works better than the D&D alignment system is the Palladium alignment system. It just seems to make more sense.
Here are the alignments described in the Palladium rules system. I found them to be both more interestingly described, and more player-friendly when they are being applied.
Principled (Good)
Principled characters are, generally, the strong, moral character.
(They rarely lie, respect the law, try to be ALWAYS honest, etc.. A true lawful by-the-book good)
Scrupulous (Good)
Scrupulous characters value life and freedom above all else, and
despise those who would deprive others of them. This type of hero is
typically portrayed in many Clint Eastwood and Charles Bronson films;
the person who is forced to work beyond the law, yet for the law, and
the greater good of the people. They are not vicious or vindictive men,
but are men driven to right injustice. I must point out that these characters
will always attempt to work with or within the law whenever possible.
Many cyber-knights are scrupulous.
Unprincipled (Selfish)
This, basically, good person tends to be selfish, greedy, and holds
his/her personal freedom and welfare above almost everything else.
He/she dislikes confining laws, self-discipline and distrusts authority.
This is the Han Solo, Star Wars, character. The guy who is always
looking for the best deal, associates with good and evil characters, is
continually tempted to lie and cheat, and hates himself for being loyal
and helping others.
Anarchist (Selfish)
This type of character likes to indulge himself in everything. He is
the insurgent, con-man, gambler and high roller; the uncommitted
freebooter seeking nothing more than self-gratification. This character
will, at least, consider doing anything if the price is right. These people
are intrigued by power, glory and wealth. Life has meaning, but his
has the greatest meaning. Laws and rules infringe on personal freedom
and were meant to be broken. An anarchist aligned person is always
looking for the best deal, and will work with good, selfish or evil to
get it; as long as he comes out of the situation on top. The anarchist
is continually teetering between good and evil, rebelling, and bending
the law to fit his needs. Often mercenaries fall into this category
Miscreant (Evil)
This self-serving, unscrupulous character is out only for himself.
Power, glory, wealth, position, and anything that will make his life
more comfortable is his goal. It matters not who gets caught in the
middle, as long as he comes out smelling like a rose. This person will
lie, cheat and kill anyone to attain his personal goals.
Aberrant (Evil)
The cliche that there is "No honor among thieves." is false when
dealing with the aberrant character. This is a person who is driven to
attain his goals through force, power, and intimidation. Yet the aberrant
person stands apart from the norm, with his own, personal code of
ethics (although twisted ethics by the standards of good). He expects
loyalty from his minions, punishing disloyalty and treachery with a
swift, merciful death. An aberrant person will always keep his word
of honor and uphold any bargains. He will define his terms and live
by them, whether anyone else likes it or not.
Diabolic (Evil)
This is the category where the megalomaniacs, violent, and most
despicable characters fall. This is the cruel, brutal killer who trusts no
one and has no value for anyone or anything that gets in his way.
Aberrant aligned characters find these dishonorable people just as revolting
as a good aligned character.
When you think about it, these alignment allow for much less bi-dimensional characters than in D&D.
Quote from: jeff37923;1125235I hate Palladium game rules, but one of the things that I think works better than the D&D alignment system is the Palladium alignment system. It just seems to make more sense.
I always found Palladium alignment to be too proscribed, DnD alignment was much better.
I think there are four alignments in practice: Lawful Preachy, Chaotic Fuckwit, Evil Bastard and Neutral Greedy. Every behaviour I've ever seen in game was the result of one of these.
Quote from: Azraele;1125226Damn, I think alignment just sucks.
Count me in this camp as well. Regardless of original intention, as you say the only purpose served by an alignment mechanic is to enforce archetype (note, I consider "factions" to be an entirely different thing from "alignment"). For me, that's no different from railroading the narrative to enforce story. Just as I prefer the story to emerge from the players' actions, so I prefer a character's moral and ethical qualities to be defined by what the character does. I find the characters' morality so much more interesting this way.
Like Tarot, Meyers-Briggs, et al, the alignment chart has always been a fun spectrum upon which to interpret behavior. But it falls entirely flat for me when used as a rule for behavioral expectations.