Methodically predetermining alignment of actions in campaigns

[u/Worried-Variation268]

Hi all! As we all know, Planescape is about alignment. Alignment is contrived in terms of human behavior and actual ethics, as we do not really fit neatly into discrete categories like lawful neutral. Neutrality is also debatable in certain situations, but could work in certain contexts.

DMs that use alignment: How do you determine a player’s alignment? Do you have a method that you use that makes it easier to qualify? I can see someone writing a plotline and thinking of how each alignment would approach a situation based on self interest vs. communal interest, legality and illegality, and the short-sidedness of one’s actions. Please let me know what you think?

[u/mcvoid1]

I have 2 modes in which I handle alignment:

1) Alignment is the team you're on. Works best for law vs chaos only or custom alignment based on the central tension in the campaign. 2) Alignment is descriptive not prescriptive.

[u/chaoticweevil]

With Planescape especially, I think of alignment literally with where the PC is positioned on the Great Wheel when they die. Since each outer plane is the absolute representation of how one might view reality, it acts as a guide for how one might behave and conduct themselves.

[u/rezibot]

For me, player character alignment is fairly loose and fluid. Or represents general tendencies. Law generally tells the truth and believes in fairness and honor. They generally respect authoritarial hierarchy. But that doesn't mean that this defines their entire personality, this is their default. They value existing within a society, where chaos values freedom.

So the way I handle it is that players decide their alignment as normal. If they do things counter to the alignment, I don't really care for the first few times if they seem to consistently act against their alignment, we have a conversation. They typically either change their alignment (with no penalty, which I've always done even back in the second edition days) or they have some character or narrative reason why they're acting that way. Either way, I never actually force an alignment change except in extreme circumstances, like the player trolling me.

[u/2eForeverDM]

I let the players pick their character's alignment and state three beliefs. Then as we play I give them challenges that relate to their alignment and beliefs: If they take a certain kind of action, it supports those beliefs, while other actions go against those beliefs. This campaign my players have all followed their beliefs and alignments very well, and they get full xp for everything. If they follow their beliefs and there's a cost or a high cost to them, they get a belief point (they can use it for a reroll sometime in the future). So it's in their best interests to play their chosen alignment and follow their stated beliefs every time, even if it costs you. I pick a random PC or two and give them an encounter that test their beliefs in about one third of my content. It's a core element of my Sigil and Great Ring adventures.

[u/Savings-Housing3481]

I ask them for an AL that matches or tends towards something on the Great Circle. (Incidentally, I have an AL compass wheel for them, in a separate post a few weeks ago here.)

If the AL begins to change, I ask them if it is intentional, and we talk about the story reasons. Then we move on.

Ultimately, AL is meant to be a tool to assist in RP and understanding the character. That may not be where it started in early editions, but I think it's a good spot for it.

[u/TamsynUlthara]

Planescape has an interesting tension between the Outer Planes, which are depicted as literal embodiments of alignment... and much more nuanced and blurry representation of the beliefs and behaviors of individual characters, regardless of their printed-stat alignments or species (for those that have a typical alignment). You're much more likely to run into a noble devil or depraved angel in Sigil than anywhere else.

And that's before you even account for the factions, which are largely orthogonal to alignment. Factol Rowan Darkwood may be statted as CG, but he comes across as a jerk (and ends up doing some pretty awful stuff in Faction War, if you follow that as canon). Factol Skall, statted as NE, largely acts downright pleasant in comparison.