Open Discussion: Alignment restrictions

[wilkins1952]

So how do people feel about removing the alignment restrictions on classes like Barb/Bard/Monk/PrC classes like Assassin PM. (Of course if someone goes PM as a Good aligned Char that is something that the DMs should spot and be Alright you get bonked for that)

This would allow for more freedom in character design and portrayal. However I think that restrictions on Clerics/Favour souls/Druids Is still a good idea "You have to be within 1 step of your god." And then perhaps a more loose restriction for Paladins to Lawful Any

[Maiyannah]

In general, it should be noted that part of the balancing of their classes is in limiting their availability and scope, if we make them more broadly available and less limited, it is best if we counterbalance that with other concerns.

One specific mention: Pale Master is a class I just don't like. The way it's implemented is just entirely too powerful and it would basically make you a monster in Ravenloft (Dark Powers Checks etc). I would probably consider removing or restricting it entirely.

Bard's alignment restriction makes no sense to me and I'm content with removing it wholesale with no further consideration.

Barbarian is a little thornier, as is monk. The alignment restriction is meant to enforce the theme of the class, and Im rerticent to let up on things that are there to enforce themes.

Assassain, yeah, I can see non-evil assassins being a thing. I'd say any evil or any lawful would be a reasonable compromise without any futher consideration - they're either doing it for a thrill, or as a bounty hunter, sort of thing, in which case they're working well within the law.

Were there other classes you'd consider?

[wilkins1952]

One specific mention: Pale Master is a class I just don't like. The way it's implemented is just entirely too powerful and it would basically make you a monster in Ravenloft (Dark Powers Checks etc). I would probably consider removing or restricting it entirely.

I do get feeling that way, Perhaps making PM/Hallowed Witch/DrD into an app is the best idea, Not entirely restricting but enough that people who play those classes are capable of showing that they are able to do so properly. More so a sanity check than anything

Barbarian is a little thornier, as is monk. The alignment restriction is meant to enforce the theme of the class, and Im rerticent to let up on things that are there to enforce themes.

Barbarian is probably one of the weaker classes overall, Not to mention is already limited by the fact they cannot read and write by default. also there is in my eyes justification for a Neutral Evil/True Neutral Monk. Thinking along the lines of just in Ravenloft the Monks from the Lawgivers. So perhaps Limiting these to being able to go Neutral as well as Chaotic/Lawful might be the better idea?

[Maiyannah]

I do get feeling that way, Perhaps making PM/Hallowed Witch/DrD into an app is the best idea, Not entirely restricting but enough that people who play those classes are capable of showing that they are able to do so properly. More so a sanity check than anything

I make it no secret that I am not a fan of applications. Having an application process makes for a large deal of bureacracy and for a small server as we are undoubtedly going to be, this is not very tenable; it will take admin time away from making interesting stories and hold it captive over administrata.

I would prefer to say: these classes are ones that can come from a plot that is overseen by a DM. Or if taken on player initiative, they can take screencaps and logs and send them to a DM and the DM can come up with some event or other trial to judge whether they feel the player is cheesing it or if their RP earns the more powerful classes.

Barbarian is probably one of the weaker classes overall, Not to mention is already limited by the fact they cannot read and write by default.

I would compromise it as: you can multiclass as barbarian or have a neutral alignment rather than lawful, if you're willing to eat the illiteracy thing. It is indeed a big malus - but its a big malus balancing out fairly substantial advantages such as their DR and move speed. These often aren't represented in tabletop, but they are a big factor in NWN.

Although this is speaking to another server, Roxane was Ranger/Barbarian and she could absolutely rock people well into 14, 15, 16 .. as a level 8. Its a very powerful class when paired with multiclasses, and that's where barbarian shines (multiclassing)

also there is in my eyes justification for a Neutral Evil/True Neutral Monk. Thinking along the lines of just in Ravenloft the Monks from the Lawgivers. So perhaps Limiting these to being able to go Neutral as well as Chaotic/Lawful might be the better idea?

Both for this case and more general other cases that we don't action mechanically:
I would consider such things an exemption we can make at the DM level if we can devise a way to boop people. Given that "falling" from the class is handled by a script, we can have players flagged as exceptional so long as they maintain an agreed upon deviant

[wilkins1952]

I think player initiative is a good idea to allow for those classes no one wants to come up with a concept and then be told "No sorry can't do that." If the RP is solid enough. Screenshots and then a DM introduction seems to be acceptable.

Keeping the Illitracy and then allowing Neutral alignment and Multiclassing seems like a good compromise yes, As well as making it so that Barbarians have to take a feat to learn how to read and write. And if it is possible to boop people then yes that seems prudent and a solid way to deal with outliers.

[Maiyannah]

I think player initiative is a good idea to allow for those classes no one wants to come up with a concept and then be told "No sorry can't do that." If the RP is solid enough. Screenshots and then a DM introduction seems to be acceptable.

In general I think this is the best way to go. It's saying we will allow it if they earn it, when it comes to exceptions, and that seems fair instead of just saying no and having it be the P&P mechanics, personally. We will have people upset when we say no, but they have to be reasonable about it. We cant always bend the rules either.

Keeping the Illitracy and then allowing Neutral alignment and Multiclassing seems like a good compromise yes, As well as making it so that Barbarians have to take a feat to learn how to read and write.

Agreed here. I'd change them to any chaotic or neutral. I'll look into making sure they keep illiteracy when multiclassing.

And if it is possible to boop people then yes that seems prudent and a solid way to deal with outliers.

It requires a fair bit of scripting to make a script which allows for these exceptions (and they would only work on the next level as you may expect), but it is very possible. It's more time consuming than difficult.

I can't promise it's the first thing I look at as it won't be but I'd be willing to put this on my list of things to implement

[Ouroboros]

Personally, I strip Alignment systems out of the vast majority of games I run. Unless you're dealing with a creature whose alignment is an intrinsic property of their nature, such as most Planar beings spawned from particular realms such as the Nine Hells and it's Lawful Evil Baatezu, Alignment as a system fails both players and DMs in almost every single respect it attempts to touch on.

Alignment as a system attempts to define a person's moral beliefs, but is very much a product of it's times and subject to the bias of it's writers; drug use in 3.x, for example, is considered an evil act as per the Book of Vile Darkness. Philosophical issues mesh messily with game mechanics, such as using a 'Detect Evil' spell as a Paladin of Oghma on someone whom goes out of their way to burn and destroy all knowedge they find would not necessarily yield a result, even if by the dogmatic beliefs of his religion that person is committing evil acts.

It creates a constant tug of war where performing every day actions perpetually shifts your alignment by a point forward or back along the two axis; something that no sane person would want to micromanage, let alone a DM managing multiple player characters.

As a result, in nearly every game I run I strip out the entire Alignment system, which results in several things; one, players don't worry about 'representing their alignment', which removes all manner of roleplay that is unfitting to the character's portrayal. A lot of players are concerned with their character Alignment being an intrinsic identifier and not simply a descriptive system, which is understandable given how D&D in particular represents it. Two, all the myriad spells that have weird interactions with characters, such as Protection From Evil giving numeric bonuses against the Chaotic Evil gang of bandits whom have been alignment shifted due to robbing stagecoaches of wealthy local nobles, can be changed to other things that have a more grounded reality in the setting; rather than having Protection from Alignment, I change all of these to Protection From Planar Subtype instead; Protection From The Hells for example grants benefits against Baatezu and other Nine Hells-aligned entities. Detect Evil is changed to Detect Anathema, which warns a Paladin if someone nearby has ill intent towards themselves or their religion.

A lot of these would struggle to be implemented correctly in NWN, if at all, without DM oversight when they are used. But for alignment restrictions on classes, I think we should ditch them entirely. Stuff like Assassin for example has numerous alternate takes on the class that are ultimately just reflavoured versions of the Assassin class attempting to skirt around it's alignment restrictions. If it weren't an insane amount of development time I'd suggest doing the same to a lot of the alignment-contingent spells and innate abilities, but I know to pick my battles. If nothing else I'd suggest just stripping out alignment spells from the module, since that's thematically appropriate for Ravenloft in a lot of ways.

[Maiyannah]

I tend to just take alignment as a general very vague compass of a players perception of their character's general inclinations and leave it at that alone. You have too much sticky shit otherwise.

However, while I agree with ignoring it in principle, and I often do in my tabletop games, far too much of the game mechanics are laid on this foundation to simply ignore it in game, and we do not, I think, have the time to sink into rejigging the entire mechanics of the way clerics work to strip alignment from deities, for instance - and thats just one problem.

The reason I would ask for specific examples is basically because I think it's best to pick our battles here.

I do think the Protection / Circle spells are something we can do without though I'm not sure how easy it is to remove a base spell.

[wilkins1952]

I'd be hesitant to remove the Protection/Circle alignment spells from a game balance stand point. Given often they are one of the few ways to boost ones AC in the early game and the protection they offer from an RP standpoint as well is also useful. Not to mention Gate requries you to be under the effect of Protection to work properly.

[Maiyannah]

I'd be hesitant to remove the Protection/Circle alignment spells from a game balance stand point. Given often they are one of the few ways to boost ones AC in the early game and the protection they offer from an RP standpoint as well is also useful. Not to mention Gate requries you to be under the effect of Protection to work properly.

Personally, I actually want to reduce the balooning numbers with damage and AC both you can get from spells and items if I can. It becomes a WoW like thing of just grinding to get the biggest number I am not terribly fond of. The other benefits of Protection are offered by Clarity.

As to Gate, that is canonically impossible, outside of special circumstances, in Ravenloft. Technically Summon Planar Ally should be as well. The mists keep their domain jealously, and brook little outside interference.

To say nothing of if we do have outsiders we have to consider the Reality Distortion.