Alignment System

Alignments are a dull, unnecessary appendix that lingers in RPGs because its familiar and people cling to it as a crutch.

>objective value assessments assigned to out-of-context and motivation-less methodologies
It's shit.

The idea that purchasing goods and purchasing information are inherently good or neutral is retarded and you've provided no reasoning to why it should be structured in that manner.

>>52013995
>Having an Alignment mechanic at all.

Consistently more trouble than they're worth.

>>52013995
Delete everything in the box and alignment systems in general and you're good

>>52014034
Consistency is an aid.

>>52014040
hurr durr buying an item is just like stabbing the guy and taking it

>>52014080
Merchant is there to sell items. Bothering him/her for other things isn't good, nor bad. Neutral.

File: 1484304451371.jpg (115KB, 680x989px) Image search: [Google]

115KB, 680x989px

>>52013995
No way someone can be this retarded.

>>52014158

Alignment systems to not aid consistency. If anything they create inconsistency where what a character would do ends up clashing with the arbitrary definitions of their 'alignment'.

>>52013995
>Only people providing their own alternative will have their criticism listened to.

Just like one must be five star chef to criticize cooking or must be a master artist to criticize art?

Take that shit back to whatever hugbox you came from.

>>52013995
>Have I, dare I say, saved RPGs?
No. You shit the bed even worse than the regular alignment system, which is impressive.

>>52014185
>If anything they create inconsistency where what a character would do ends up clashing with the arbitrary definitions of their 'alignment'.
Both of you are idiots. Alignment should be defined by character, not the other way around. If you choose to make them rigid and arbitrary and punish people for not adhering to one dimensional caricatures, that's entirely on you

>>52014158
Yet information could be brokered, it is not a neutral item just because it's possibly intangible.

I don't see how this saves RPGs at all.
I suppose if you thought DnD was lacking a programmed response to merchants then maybe you've solved a very niche . . . 'Problem'.

>>52014269

>If you choose to make them rigid and arbitrary and punish people for not adhering to one dimensional caricatures, that's entirely on you

This is, classically, how alignment systems are defined. I agree they work much better if used loosely... But at that point, you might as well just not use them at all.

>>52014287
>Stick shift cars are terrible! They can't go above first gear and then the transmission burns out for no reason the moment you get on the freeway!
>You're clearly using the car wrong
>Sure, that's *classically* how you're supposed to drive stick, but...
I agree that alignment systems are a pointless legacy mechanic (the fact that hardly anyone uses them besides D&D and Not!D&D is proof in and of itself), but at the same time every game I've played that uses them clearly tells you how they're supposed to work. If people can't be bothered to read the book, or deliberately warp the mechanic so they can break it and feel clever for it, that's on them.

File: alignment.gif (40KB, 487x487px) Image search: [Google]

40KB, 487x487px

>>52013995
> Only people providing their own alternative will have their criticism listened to.
Your alignment chart is shit.

File: gabelstapler.jpg (26KB, 445x445px) Image search: [Google]

26KB, 445x445px

>>52013995
You know what's better than alignments? Forklifts! Let's design a game based on forklifts!

>>52014034
>>52014108
whiny crybabies butthurt that they're friends are retarded attention-seeking teenage (or manchild) autists who make everything suck

>>52013995
I'm surprised someone has even bothered to type out this crap, even if it's supposed to be "bait".