Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.3 alpha 4/15/85; site cbosgd.UUCP
Path: utzoo!watmath!clyde!cbosgd!djb
From: djb@cbosgd.UUCP (David J. Bryant)
Newsgroups: net.games.frp
Subject: Alignment
Message-ID: <1139@cbosgd.UUCP>
Date: Mon, 6-May-85 10:34:12 EDT
Article-I.D.: cbosgd.1139
Posted: Mon May  6 10:34:12 1985
Date-Received: Wed, 8-May-85 01:41:01 EDT
Organization: AT&T Bell Laboratories, Columbus, Oh
Lines: 60

I think that most of the controversy about playing/DM'ing Paladins
stems from a basic lack of general agreement on alignment.  I have found
that the concept of alignment, although essential to the game, is perhaps
the hardest thing to explain to new players, and also the most difficult
aspect of the role-playing that is central to FRP games.  In order to make
it easier for me as both a player and a DM, I have tried to come up with
a simplified explanation of the various alignment components so that
it is easier for me to consistantly play/DM characters.  It would be
interesting to me to have this subject discussed widely among the serious,
experienced FRP'ers on the net to see if we can perhaps further refine
the concept, and hammer out some reasonably acceptable common foundation
for discussing alignment and dealing with alignment-based game events.

To start things off, here are the basic interpretations I use.  Let me
say beforhand that I realize we are trying to embody an amazingly complex
set of concepts in a small 3x3 matrix of alignment components, and are
therefore going to radically over simplify.  Given the importance of
alignment, however, I am willing to accept considerable oversimplification
in the interest of clarity and ease of consistent play.

LAWFUL - Hold the concept of Law most dear.  Believes that the individual
	 must make sacrifices in the interest of society/community.  "The
	 needs of the many outway the needs of the few, or the one."  
	 People who violate the society/LAW concept should be punished 
	 (although punishment may not be meted out until the "afterlife".)

CHAOTIC - Believes that he/she is most important, and is unwilling to give up
	any freedoms or opportunities in the interest of a larger group.
	This makes CHAOTICS often the destabilizing element in an adventuring
	party.  ("I want to see what's behind that curtain, and don't care 
	what the rest of you think...")    Remember that CHAOS is not
	necessarily either GOOD or EVIL (see below).

GOOD - Believes that each individual's right to life is sacred.  Obviously
       there will be variation in the definition of "individual" in each 
       GOOD character's mind.  (Use common sense here - the 47,373 microbes 
       you killed upon taking a deep breath are not "individuals").

EVIL - Asigns no special meaning to "life", and will indiscriminately take
       the life of another without remorse.  If asked to philosophize, an
       EVIL character will perhaps indicate that creatures must justify
       their existance.

NEUTRAL - Balanced between each of the two opposing forces.  This is generally
       not hard to imagine, although it is often difficult to balance in the
       long run (true-neutrals often evidence an alignment drift over a long
       period of playing, even though they won't admit it.)

Comments?  Please remember to keep these "definitions" simple.  I don't want
to have to hand players a ten page treatise when they ask me about my
interpretation of alignment. 

	David Bryant   AT&T Bell Laboratories   Columbus, OH   (614) 860-4516
	(cbosgd!djb)

ps: Many others, even the Obnoxious EGG have expounded at length on the
    topic "Lawful Good != Lawful Stupid".  In particular, it galls me to
    see people insist that a 1st level LG character would charge head-first
    into a room that contains four Balrogs.  Nothing could be further from
    the truth.  (Well, perhaps if the character's intelligence was 6 or less...).