Guide to Role-Play

[XpYtZ]

What, if I may ask, exactly do you disagree with? Is it that Good people should not harm people without reason or that Evil people should not do good without gain?

For all those that are having trouble with my alignment statement.
I was never placing a brick wall between Good actions and Evil actions I was only saying that you should attempt to play the character according to the Alignment that you have chosen.
Your actions move you on the D&D alignment wheel. If you chose to be Good and do something Evil you move towards Evil and must cross Neutral along the way. Instantaneous changes in Alignment are generally thought to occur when a major, catastrophic event changes the characters view of the world; which is what your alignment represents, your way of viewing the world. Good characters can steal but they will move towards Evil. Evil characters can rescue someone but they will move towards Good.
It was never my intention to make a treatise on Alignment nor will I make one. However people do break character in this manner all the time. To say that acting outside of your Alignment is not a break of character is to absolve the entire Alignment structure.
Be you Good Lawful, Evil Chaotic or even Evil Lawful, you will have to make your character view the world in one way or another and they must have a reason for acting in a way that does not agree with that view, or they risk acting schizophrenic.
No one said it was a foolproof system. It is after all representing human emotions and thought patterns in only one word. What I was saying was that people tend to ignore it.
The entire section needs a good rewrite, of that I am well aware, and one is in the works but it will never meet with everyone?s expectations because alignment is a very touchy and controversial subject. I am surprised that I have only received three posts about it actually.
Oh and that is not a request for more.

[Syzerian]

Im sure we could create our own unique alignment system as I find the D&D system a bit to vague. We need an alignment for people like me who are evil but on the good side, but for now I guess I will just remain \'Unknown\'

[Golbez]

Originally posted by Syzerian
Im sure we could create our own unique alignment system as I find the D&D system a bit to vague. We need an alignment for people like me who are evil but on the good side, but for now I guess I will just remain \'Unknown\'

How can you be evil on the good side? Perhaps you mean \"evil\", but having a code of honour, respect for courtesy, and fair methods? That qualifies as \"Lawful Evil\" to some, due to the character abidding to very specific rules of society, although possessing ulterior motives.

The D&D alignment system is, quite right, very vague. It is supposed to be. After all, you are classifying the entire world under only nine different categories. Of course there are more than nine kinds of individuals, but what the alignment system finds is the \"core rules\" which \"govern\" their behaviour.

I am willing to consider other systems, but I believe the Lawful/Chaotic and Evil/Neutral/Good works just fine.

What I believe many people confuse is \"alignment\" with \"personality\".

I propose an example that due to its lack of variables, its simplicity eases the comprehension of the alignment system somewhat. Paladins are, in the D&D rules (2nd Edition, at least, I do not recall if it is the same for the 3E rule set) supposed to be \"Lawful Good\". Should they drift to another alignment they will lose their class (And therefore special abilities) and be known as \"Fallen Paladins\", or just \"Fallen\".

Now, Paladins are restricted solely to the Lawful Good alignment, and that cannot be changed. But does it mean our Paladins will all be alike? Absolutely not! They all act under the same principles (Honour, loyalty, dignity, respect, grace, etcetera), but they may conduct themselves quite differently.

A Paladin may be a charming young fellow, following every rule of proper conduct and speaking in a formal, knightly and courtly way.

Another Paladin may be arrogant and foolhardy, overconfident in his own skills and therefore faces the consequences of this quirk of his.

A third Paladin may even have schizoid problems, failing to build friendships and acquaintances due to his distrust for everyone and anyone, honest yet tactless mentality that some find abrassive and occasionally insulting, and problems relating with his peers.

Our last example of a Paladin may be a seemingly emotionless man. Ruled only by racionalism and careful analysis of the circumstances, and never allowing his sentiments to jeopardise the outcome in a given situation.

All of them are \"Lawful Good\" because they all have the same view on life. But all of them are different in how they live it.

And that is what a player must go for when creating a character: uniqueness, originality, and believability. The alignment is not a restriction, it is a method for us to say \"Well, my character more or less thinks THIS way\".

http://www.atfantasy.com/view/18 is an article that has a bit stricter view on alignment, but is a good approximation to the subject.

- Golbez

[Nimfis Altmer]

I used to roleplay... Like 3 years ago but everyone became so insanely attached to it and ruined the fun..

[Gilibran]

the last three examples of paladins you mention are the reason they are immune to disease  

[Incenjucar]

...By and large, good words...BUT...

The issue with conjunction is problematic.

1) People use conjunctions in every day conversation, especially in any group not required to keep up appearances.

2) This tends to become especially common in cross-cultural situations.  For instance, in my Japanese class, they taught us the term \'biru\'.  It\'s shore for \"birudingu\" or the like, and is a conversion of the western word \"Building\".

3) Language changes constantly.  Words like \'because\'  and \'cannot\' were not always words in themselves.  Trying to pin point the longer form of each word is a bit rough, since you\'d eventually be speaking Old English.

4) Planeshift is NOT European Middle Ages Earth.  Nor is D&D nor most settings where people start this up.  There\'s no reason to think we\'re even speaking \"English\" in-game.  This is not a Ren Faire (And most of those are horribly against period anyways).

With language, you should focus more on -tone-.  Get the right feeling across.  Especially pleasant if you have an -accent- of some sort.

\'Owdy guvna\" and all that.

Speak properly for your character, not for illogical sensibilities.

[buddha]

I have struggled with this issue of language selection.  In general, I go with a Southern U.S. post-civil way Mark Twain kind of thing.  I feel it adds an element of eloquence to the game without sounding as wooden as \"God ye good den, fine sir.\"  That\'s unnatural.  I feel as long as we\'re not using \"k\" for okay and we\'re thinking about what we\'re *saying* rather than making compromised for *typing* then every dialect is acceptable.

Hmm, I think I\'m in the minority.  Any eloquence is better than no eloquence, however.

As for alignments, I\'ve always had difficulties with them. In D&D I played a monk who was personally lawful good, in that he believed in strict personal discipline and  self-sacrifice, but a sort of chaotic good when it came to governance, since the local governments were involved in hedonistic tendencies.  I mean, the Shao-Lin monks didn\'t exactly respect the Chi\'Na government, but we\'re anarchists either...

[Incenjucar]

D&D alignments have always caused a lot of conflicts.

The trick is to play your character, than figure it out.

We once had an interesting thread on the D&D boards...

Some guy thought he was a CG elf-like person.

We determined he was lawful neutral.

[XpYtZ]

You usually will not be ostracized by the people that have not taken RP too far but it does elevate you to another level

The language rules that I suggest are not to bring people down or stagnate the language but rather to encourage good communication. Most people use conjunctions to often or wrong and not using them at all avoids the mess. I am not against the use of them all together but, like the quote says, it will usually elevate you to another level within a game.
None of these suggestion were ever meant to be PS specific (though many people have tryed to make them so) but rather just a show of good form for people who are interested in learning to RP and never have touched the subject. You can\'t make a rocking chair just because you have been given the tools, and neither can you RP just because you read this thread. But it is more an aid for those that are lost on etiquet.

[Incenjucar]

Using punctuation and so forth PROPERLY is good.

Avoiding things is just silly unless you\'re playing a butler or other high spoken character.

Butler:  \"My goodness.  You certainly are a rapscallion.  It can not be denied, my lady.\"

Tavern-goer:  \"Oy, roit then, yo\' a regula\' fireball ain\'chee?  Can\'t be denied overmuch, now can it, m\'lady?\"

If you sound like the Butler when playing a random stereotypical drunken country bumpkin, I don\'t care how impressive your diction is, you\'re not RPing very well.

Good communication is for Tells.  -Realistic- communication, on the other hand, is great for RP.

Think \"The Adventures of Huckleberry Finn\".

[capkanada]

Alignments...hmmm....

D & D has a good system...for D&D.  I\'ve played a few different games out there, and two that I\'ve dipped into have by far my favorite type of alignment \"structures\" (or lack of).

Rifts:
Principled
    The classic \"lawful good\" alignment, respecting law, order, authority figures, self-discipline, and honor. These characters will never knowingly break the law. Principled characters do not use torture, nor will they kill for pleasure. These characters will always keep their word, and rarely, if ever, lie. Neither this character nor the Scrupulous character will kill or attack an unarmed foe.

Scrupulous
    This is the classic action hero as portrayed by Charles Bronson, Chuck Norris, and Jackie Chan. While the character prefers to work with the law, he or she knows the difference between law and justice, and often finds him or herself working outside or even against the law in order to correct injustice.

Unprincipled
    This is the type of selfish character best portrayed by Harrison Ford in his classic roles of Han Solo and Indiana Jones. This character is generally out for himself, yet finds himself helping others and hating himself for doing so. This character will associate with both good and evil characters, and is often tempted to lie and cheat.

Anarchist
    The Anarchist character epitomizes the term \"every man for himself\". These characters don\'t break the rules, they bend them... a lot. This character has little to no respect for authority, so long as, when the stuff hits the fan, he comes out smelling like a rose.

Miscreant
    One step down from the Anarchist is the Miscreant character. Like the Anarchist, the Miscreant is simply out for himself. However, the Anarchist is not necessarily ruthless in attaining his goals; the Miscreant is. While the other alignments will not kill for pleasure, this character may.

Aberrant
    This is the classic \"lawful evil\" alignment. This character is driven to attain his goals through power, force, and intimidation, but lives by a strict, if twisted, code of ethics. He will always keep his word or honor, but is careful to say exactly what he means, and he means exactly what he says. For instance, if this character says, \"If I find out that you lied to me, I will kill you,\" the person he said that to better not be lying. This character will always twist the law to meet his goals, and will never torture or kill for pleasure.

Diabolic
    I\'ve seen this alignment is best described as \"your typical everyday slimeball\". This is the alignment typically reserved for merciless killers, megalomaniacs, and the like. Be extremely careful when playing this alignment, for the character may not last long. I usually reserve this alignment for NPC villains.

and...

Shadowrun:
Pretty much no alignments... just different shades of grey.  Everyone has their idiosyncracies...good?  evil?  No way to be purely either....

Ex.:  The shopkeeper is out for his own hide.. wants to make money any way they can..keep turning a profit...one day, a poor, bedraggled stranger walks in, faints on his floor, and is nearly unrevivable.  Biting the bullet, the shopkeeper dips into his reserves (at a loss, no less (!)) and feeds/gets healing for the stranger (that way they\'re not laying on the floor, scaring away the business..big priority for the shopkeeper as the dollar/trias/gold/nuyen/whatever flow is the only thing keeping his undercover assassin ring supplied. ).

These are just examples...myself, I prefer the second, although the Rifts example is a good framework.  As far as the whole G/N/E L/C thing goes, I\'ve always found it a bit too limiting as far as expression goes.

Maybe its just me...

[DA@planeshift]#  Dikoke?  He\'s...well...that\'d be telling, now wouldn\'t it?

[Aiselyn]

Originally posted by Golbez

In disagreement with Mogura, I would say that Chaotic characters present many intricacies and difficulties.

- Golbez

I agree. I see someone who is chaotic being very deep. They are undecided as to how they should react to the world, either because of their history, or because of present conditions.

Let\'s say, for example, as a child, you were raised on a farm (like the guide says). However, you did not have a happy time on that farm. You hated farmwork, but you were forced to do it. Your mother was very strict. You were forced to abide by her rules: eat correctly, wake up at 6 am everyday, and (blah blah blah blah blah). If you did something wrong, you\'d be punished.

Now you are free from the farm, roaming around Hydlaa with a new life, but some of those things from the past are likely to haunt you. One thing in particular, your freedom would feel rather weird if you were always told what to do. Now you can do what you want? This sudden notion of freedom can really go all over the place on alignment.

You may choose to stay on the same path as your past and abide by the rules (the lawful alignment). It\'s what you learned in your childhood. You\'re afraid to even bend rules due to the unconcious notion of \"punishment\" in the back of your mind.

On the other hand you may take a more chaotic stance and become rebellious. You may want to break rules. You may hate anyone who the least bit resembles the strictness of your mother. You may steal things, curse, anything to be rid of the mother inside your head.

To make things even more complicated, you could be all of the above. You may be undecided between the notion of the law, and the notion of freedom. Such a person could one day abide by the rules, and another day break them. It\'s not unrealistic for such a character to exist. It\'s really based on two things: (1) past experience and (2) the personality you were born with and how it reacts to that past experience.

The reason why people can be so complex is because so much experience goes through one\'s life. Experience is what shapes us to who we are today.

PS: Also, though I might add in another link to a name generator I\'m kind of fond of

http://www.rinkworks.com/namegen/

[Moogie]

Off topic- I use that very same generator when changing character names. It\'s great!

[Aiselyn]

I love how you can control what comes out with that generator by creating your own template (I know I know....off topic )

[XpYtZ]

What an exilent tool! Why did no one tell me about it before?   ) *looks toward teh Moogie*