[Request] Torment-like alignment system
AndreaColombo
Member Posts: 5,533
I believe everyone on these boards is acquainted with Planescape: Torment and the way alignment is handled there in. For those who aren't, in Planescape: Torment you start out as True Neutral and your alignment is adjusted dynamically throughout the game depending on your deeds, actions, and the way you relate to other people. This is quite possibly the best, most realistic and correct way to handle alignment in a D&D game. It also makes evil alignments more viable/playable.
My request is therefore for BG:EE to handle alignment the way Planscape: Torment does. Currently, you start out with the alignment you select at character creation and you're stuck with it for the whole game regardless of your behavior. You could be a Lawful Good jerk, or a well-mannered Chaotic Evil guy. It makes no sense. It is fine for players to be able to pick an alignment at character creation, but then their actions should live up to it or it be changed. This way, alignment would cease to be (almost) completely irrelevant in game.
Also, the alignment chosen at character creation shouldn't influence your Reputation score, because:
- As it is now, one could pick Lawful Good for the Reputation bonus then roleplay any other alignment of their choice. It would be better if they could freely select the desired alignment from the very start with no effects on Reputation, and work on both as they play.
- As it would be if my request was implemented, one could pick Lawful Good for the Reputation bonus then have their alignment re-adjusted to the desired one through roleplaying.
In both cases, that would be bad roleplaying. Not an especially dire issue, mind you, but I don't see it making much sense so it seems logical to fix it.
My request is therefore for BG:EE to handle alignment the way Planscape: Torment does. Currently, you start out with the alignment you select at character creation and you're stuck with it for the whole game regardless of your behavior. You could be a Lawful Good jerk, or a well-mannered Chaotic Evil guy. It makes no sense. It is fine for players to be able to pick an alignment at character creation, but then their actions should live up to it or it be changed. This way, alignment would cease to be (almost) completely irrelevant in game.
Also, the alignment chosen at character creation shouldn't influence your Reputation score, because:
- As it is now, one could pick Lawful Good for the Reputation bonus then roleplay any other alignment of their choice. It would be better if they could freely select the desired alignment from the very start with no effects on Reputation, and work on both as they play.
- As it would be if my request was implemented, one could pick Lawful Good for the Reputation bonus then have their alignment re-adjusted to the desired one through roleplaying.
In both cases, that would be bad roleplaying. Not an especially dire issue, mind you, but I don't see it making much sense so it seems logical to fix it.
7
Comments
I don't know how being a paladin would be able to work though.
Being a Paladin in BG already makes it mandatory for you to behave at least in a Good way. Failure to do so results in you becoming a Fallen Paladin and losing all benefits the Paladin class has to offer over a simple Fighter. I don't see it becoming significantly more complicated with a Torment-like alignment system.
In Planescape Torment it makes sense for you to start off as True Neutral since your character is basically a blank slate. In BG that isn't entirely true since you start off with a class already.
Perhaps your alignment could change over the course of the game, but I don't think that really meshes well with some classes (Paladins, Monks, Rangers, Druids and perhaps even Clerics). Paladins can become fallen, but what happens to Rangers and Druids that deviate from their ethos?
I like how the alignment is handled in planescape torment, and personally wouldn't mind seeing it implemented into BG, but not as the "behind the scenes" variable, but as the active stat (like reputation).
this is basically the same discussion as the "enhanced reputation" and virtue mod. developers already talked about reputation system revision, and i hope alignment will be a direct result of players actions, not a fixed stat that can be ridiculously out of place in the endgame.
but i don't think you should start as a true neutral. you should still have a choice to be whatever starting alignment you desire and change in alignment is later determined by players actions. that way, your character can start as a LG paladin and may later become fallen, if he deals with the problems in unlawful/evil fashion. that is the point in my opinion, you start as something and later evolve, you are not a blank sheet.
like i mentioned in previous discussion, points for evil and good are mostly the main point of conversation, but lawful and chaotic is quite lacking. the biggest problem is neutral decisions (on both scales). they do not exist, or are treated like some middle ground between good and evil or even worse, as indecisiveness. neutral alignments should be a rightful and independent alignment, not simply a matter of balance.
also, what happens to the monk that becomes chaotic? or lawful barbarian? do all these characters become "fallen" (simply have their special abilities removed)?
it would be nice to see paladin become anti-paladin, with new powers, etc...
in the end it is questionable how much can be done within existing content, without it becoming editing the original content, because like i said, i think some alignment options are vastly underrepresented. i don't know if it is simply a matter of coding the variable ...
btw, what do you think about evil rangers? they are possible in 3E rules. would enabling them in BG be a heresy? or?
Druids were even worse, just look at Jaheira and Faldorn, neiter of them ever looked True Neutral to me, they should have been Neutral Good and Evil. I actually wished they just changed their natural alignment in BGEE even if that isn't allowed in 2E.
Becoming a "Fallen" version of your class makes sense for some, but not for all (a Fallen Barbarian would be kinda weird). Then again, roleplaying is also a factor: if you have a Monk character concept in mind, that concept is likely Lawful. Therefore, you'd play it as Lawful. If you want to be "original" and make your Monk become Chaotic is your right, and your "problem". In P&P you can potentially create all sorts of apparently (or even actually) contradictory characters, so why shouldn't this be possible in a computer game?
Id also like to make an example of an ingame event, if my character that i roleplay isnt interested in, lets say money, then Prism and Greywolf Quest for example, my character dont accept those money, first of all becuse he finds it petty to consort to thievery and secondly (or the other way around) he isnt interested in money, -and becuse i choose that option, i dont think i should get a point in good alignment etc
I can see your point.