Posted by ellokraine on April 22, 2000 at 22:40:24:
In Reply to: On alignment changes and penalties. posted by Proud Blade(VIP) on April 22, 2000 at 09:20:16:
> I'm all for characters getting burned for chainging alignment, but the current penalty system looks a bit arbitrary. It makes sense that communers would lose their communes. They come from their empowering deity, who is likely upset at such things.
>
> But why do warriors entirely forget how to legsweep or dent? Rangers no longer hide in the woods because they're having second thoughts about how they would handle moral dilemmas? The IC explanation is that the gods in general punish those who would betray their history. The OOC explanation is that the IMMs do not want people to be able to change their alignment the way they change weapons during combat. Both of these are valid points, and I agree that alignment changes should only happen when the character undergoes a major change of outlook. But the punishment doesn't seem to fit the crime in many cases.
>
> A good system would:
> 1) Be automatic in the code. IMMs have better things to do than poke around looking for people and deciding each case individually.
> 2) Penalize a character, regardless of race/class/level, without completely ruining the character. There -are- legitimate reasons for alignment changes, so the penalty should be livable, but quite difficult.
> 3) Have a history function. IMMs should be able to glance at a character and have an easy way to figure out what alignments that character has spent their life with. Again, it shouldn't involve effort for the IMM, such as writing it into the invisible-comment-space-thingy. Also, the history function would be linked to the code, and any character who undergoes a -second- alignment change should face harsher penalties.
> 4) Be able to punish ethics and morals differently. Most people consider the good/evil axis more important than the law/chaos axis, though my current character would disagree. Also, moving two "steps" (LE --> CE) should be worse than one step (LE --> NE).
> 5) Be reversible. If an IMM decides that a character properly roleplays the alignment change, and the character goes and does some quest/RP session, the IMM can lift the penalties, and no scars should remain.
>
> My thoughts:
>
> 1) Communers still lose all powers until an IMM restores them.
>
> 2) Penalty to earned experience. The character is dealing with any number of moral/ethical issues, and cannot focus on their guild's studies as well as someone with more peace of mind.
> Pros: Scalable. You could make the "good-to-evil" penalty twice as big as the "neutral-to-evil" penalty, and the second alignment change could be twice as big as the first. Applicable to all characters. Fully automated. Reversible.
> Cons: Has no effect on heroes (who should feel the most pain upon devoting such a career to their trade, then suffering such a change of heart). Also will not bother level sitters.
>
> 3) A skill learning penalty. Again, based on the idea that the character's emotional state would disrupt their concentration. Characters learn all skills/spells/songs/powers slower.
> Pros: Scalable. Universally applicable. Fully automated. Reversible, though it leaves a mark.
> Cons: Again, a character who is very well practiced can ignore this to some extent. Zomerseis could have gone through all nine ethics/morals combinations, and it would have meant he'd learn pen slower.
>
> 4) Increased spell failure. Those darn lapses in thought make even the best-practiced spells (100%) fail every once in a while. Ditto for songs.
> Pros: Scalable. Fully automated. Never stops reminding a character to go quest for an IMM to make the change "approved". Reversible.
> Cons: Only bothers those classes with spells/songs.
>
> 5) vuln_mental. With all the dilemmas, the character's willpower isn't what it used to be, and they have trouble standing firm in the face of attacks on it. Affected abilities would include many bard songs, spells like hold person, and supps like damnation and demonfire.
> Pros: Fully automated. Never stops without IMM intervention. Fully reversible. Universally applicable. Reversible. Very appropriate.
> Cons: Might be a bitch to code. Don't know if it would be scalable. Lots of judgement calls as to what skills/spells/songs/supps/powers would work better on a character with alignment problems.
>
> I would suggest a combination of all five, as they often nicely balance each other's weaknesses. (A level 10 character isn't going to face many mental attacks, but those learning penalties would be awfully rough. A hero isn't fazed by an XP penalty, but isn't going to like being vulnerable to fiend and hold.) None would be overwhelming on its own, but the combination would be a pain. Also, an IMM can approve the alignment change in stages- if the character shows some progress, but hasn't fully redeemed themselves, the XP penalty could be lifted, and the other stuff left in place.
>
> Thoughts? Comments? Cheap shots?
I understand that the Immortals have lots of things to do. But I would have to guess that part of the reward from their work is interacting with all of us in the world they maintain. As far as judging alignment playings you have to decide what kind of objective criteria you can use. Simply assigning morale values to what kinds of monsters you slay will not work. I have many characters who lie all the time. I would surely tell a pair of storm giant warriors that my chaotic nuetral transmuter is a lightwalker to get myslef in a position to rank really quickly. Besides lying there are many other facets od roleplaying that are very very subjective. Let's say that a neutral noncaballed mage ranks one day with some master necros then the next day with some Sylvan stormies. Whether he lies or not he defies any sort of objective rating system for roleplay. How do you rate Entropist roleplay? how do you rate verbal interaction between two pc's? As a former dm of many tabletop rolepalying games and also someone who does his damn best to roleplay in thera I say let the change of alignment be subjective to players and immorals. How much fun did Avendella and the Imms have together? Isnt that what we're here for?