Author Topic: Ignoring D&D when it comes to virtue  (Read 2728 times)

Offline TruePurple

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 19
Ignoring D&D when it comes to virtue
« on: June 28, 2005, 08:48:59 AM »
No offense to BG, D&D sucks as a pnp. In most gaming I've done with d&d its mostly combat, not roleplaying.

Granted thats partially  a function of the DM, but its also a function of D&D. D&D has a very limited and confusing alignment system. Chaotic often being used to mean a little more evil and lawful a little more good for many house "rules". D&D alignment system seems geared so that players can slay everything in sight and still call themselves good. That plus most of the game rules and functions relate to combat not roleplaying makes D&D inherently ill suited for roleplaying. So what some D&D book has to say about this or that race being born evil/good/neutral should be ignored imo. (partially directed at the saladrex conversation)

D&D itself should be generally ignored when it comes to the virtue mod imo.

BTW, how does virtue deal with the lawful/chaotic portion of alignment labels?
« Last Edit: June 28, 2005, 05:35:21 PM by TruePurple »

Offline Grim Squeaker

  • Fallen
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 1019
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ignoring D&D when it comes to virtue
« Reply #1 on: June 28, 2005, 09:14:07 AM »
Chaotic often being used to mean a little more evil and lawful a little more good for many house roles.

If people are playing like that, then something has gone wrong.  Perhaps the DM has misunderstood something.  To me, a Lawful Evil person could be much more evil than Chaotic Evil as a Lawful Evil person clearly believes in what they are doing.
"You alone can make my song take flight..."

Offline TruePurple

  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 19
Well thats how many a DM treats the D&D alignments, of course in a sense I can't blame them, having only good evil or neutral as alignment options is really limited.

Is it possible to add additional D&D alignment states to BG2?  For example, bad (a rather selfish individual but they still have some good points) and virtuous (really nice) contrasted with good (someone whos a "good" person but might occassionally act selfish or other negative traits)

« Last Edit: June 28, 2005, 08:38:37 PM by TruePurple »

Offline SimDing0™

  • Back In Black
  • Global Moderator
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 3496
  • Gender: Male
  • Word Enhancer
Re: Ignoring D&D when it comes to virtue
« Reply #3 on: July 06, 2005, 11:58:12 AM »
If you're concerned that I'll be adhering too strictly to D&D rules, then let me reassure you that they're right at the bottom of my list as justification for anything at all. :) (On the other hand, at this stage, I don't think there's anything in Virtue that throws the rules right out the window.)

Virtue doesn't touch the lawful/chaotic axis. There was discussion of implementing this, but the verdict seemed to be that it was harder to objectively guess what qualified as lawful/chaotic than it is good/evil.

Splitting up the stats further would probably clarify some situations, but I'd be concerned that there'd either be a lot of overlap, or some stats which barely changed throughout the game-- and that stats like "selfishness" wouldn't have much function beyond looking nice. I think I'm fairly satisfied with the distinction Virtue currently provides at the moment.

Offline Mongoose87

  • Brain Specialist
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 426
  • Gender: Male
  • Not dead, yet
Re: Ignoring D&D when it comes to virtue
« Reply #4 on: July 13, 2005, 01:47:50 PM »
TruePurple, I think you're making the common mistake of using alignments as strict rules, rather than the general guidelines they are more effectively used as.

Offline Lord Kain

  • "I was the 500th member on the old forgottenwars forum and all I got was this lousy title"
  • Planewalker
  • *****
  • Posts: 379
  • Gender: Male
Re: Ignoring D&D when it comes to virtue
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2005, 02:38:40 PM »
Exactly, this is a common D&D adventure shows stuff on this subject

Goblins have come down from the hills and started raiding villages. The party investigates and finds the Goblins were drivin from there homes by some other creature.

I have a lax working of alignments when I DM.
Chaotic Evil creatures can still make a complex plan of attack and work together. However it be easier for the party to get them to fight among each other then say a group of lawful evil creatures.

Here is an example of something that came up in my campaign.

A group of hobgoblins (a usually lawful evil creature) has set up a base only a few days away from the players home town. They've already sacked on caravan so the party goes out there looking for them. They realize as four level 7 characters they can't take on that army. From a previous encounter they discovered the hobgoblins tactics could be a problem. 1 3rd level hobgoblin charging on a mount with a lance had a fair chance of hiting and a lance on a charge hurt quite a bit.

The paladin decideds to challange the leader of the hobgoblins to a one on one duel. If the paladin wins the hobgoblins will leave for ever. The paladin lost and the wining hobgoblin took his ear.

In the next adventure, one of the paries two monks leaves and is replaced by a Bard. However the bard before meeting the party. Befriends the Lawful Evil Hobgoblin wizard. (the bard is chaotic good) The bard has no reason to dislike the Hobgoblin and the Hobgoblin has no reason to dislike the Bard.

The paladin of course really doesn't like the hobgoblin wizard with his ear necklace which contains said missing ear.

Another example is In a higher level campaign I ran had this villian an evil Monk. The party hated him beyond any NPC. Because he was a villain you escaped from them every time. He may have been lawful evil, but he loved his sister (as a brother, smartass)

The evil monk took control of a city containing the largest Mithrial mine in the world. As far as the people in that town thought this evil monk was a saint and a hero.

Lawful Evil doesn't mean they don't break laws. It does prefer they mean more organization then say a chaotic evil being.

Evil rule by law and order is just as evil as chaos's might makes right.
Now, at last, the masks had fallen away.  The strings of the puppets had become visible, and the hands of the prime mover exposed.  Most ironic of all was the last gift that Raziel had given me, more powerful than the sword that now held his soul, more acute even than the vision his sacrifice had accorded me - the first bitter taste of that terrible illusion:  Hope.


With Quick-Reply you can write a post when viewing a topic without loading a new page. You can still use bulletin board code and smileys as you would in a normal post.

Warning: this topic has not been posted in for at least 120 days.
Unless you're sure you want to reply, please consider starting a new topic.

Name: Email:
Type the letters shown in the picture
Listen to the letters / Request another image
Type the letters shown in the picture:
What color is grass?:
What is the seventh word in this sentence?:
What is five minus two (use the full word)?: