Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.2 9/18/84; site gcc-bill.ARPA
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!harvard!gcc-bill!szy
From: szy@gcc-bill.ARPA (Steven J Szymanski <SZY>)
Newsgroups: net.games.frp
Subject: Re: Alignment--the system that made me drop it
Message-ID: <257@gcc-bill.ARPA>
Date: Tue, 14-May-85 10:23:22 EDT
Article-I.D.: gcc-bill.257
Posted: Tue May 14 10:23:22 1985
Date-Received: Thu, 16-May-85 06:09:23 EDT
References: <475@sphinx.UChicago.UUCP>
Reply-To: szy@gcc-bill.UUCP (Steven J Szymanski <SZY>)
Organization: General Computer Company, Cambridge Ma (Home of the HyperDrive)
Lines: 21

?

A few years back, a friend and I want through a similar exercise and came up
with two different dimensions for alignments which relate to your
"MACHIAVELLIAN VS ANTI-MACHIAVELLIAN" and "AMORAL VS ALIGNED" but are perhaps
more orthogonal to the standard Good-Evil/Law-Chaos conflicts. They are:

Subtle vs. Direct: Do you prefer to be straightforward about your intentions
and actions, or do you prefer to work by subtle, indirect means?.

Active vs. Passive: Do you take an active role in ordering your environment to
conform to your vision of "the way things should be" or do you lets things run
their own course? If you include the character's own person in the above
statement (do you try to get yourself to live up to your own beliefs?) then
you get something similar to your "AMORAL VS ALIGNED" axis.


					Prince of Wands

					Steven J Szymanski
					harvard!gcc-bill!szy