23 replies to this topic

[Schatten]

i think in every crpg is some form of alignment(good/bad) or faction(mage/warrior/thief). do you think this is good? would you like to abandon such thoughts? are they realistic? do you have a better concept? what do you think bioware should implement?
i mean lets assume some thief organisation is evil from the point of view of the authorithies. but do you think my fellow thief friend views me as evil? i dont think so. as an example.

[Shed]

The only alternative that immediately comes to mind is the abolition of alignment and class, with a wide range of actions and abilities available.

The problem is that many characters would eventually end up like each other, having taken the most advantageous course at every turn. Disadvantages would be harder to implement. Could be done, though.

[Feanor]

i think in every crpg is some form of alignment(good/bad) or faction(mage/warrior/thief). do you think this is good? would you like to abandon such thoughts? are they realistic? do you have a better concept? what do you think bioware should implement?
i mean lets assume some thief organisation is evil from the point of view of the authorithies. but do you think my fellow thief friend views me as evil? i dont think so. as an example.

 

On the other hand, the alignment does not affect the plot, so I don't think it matters. It's a way of defining your character.

[Tom]

I dont think there is anything wrong with the idea of alignment/classes etc, but if you wanted to scrap all that I think the way it is implemented in the Elder Scrolls series is awesome. You have about 30 or so skills which are devided into different classes - magic, fighting and theif. You can choose which class your character prefers and you gain a bonus to any skills you select from that class, but it doesnt in any way restrict you. You also have 5 'main' skills and 5 'minor' skills, and you select these also (you gain a bonus to your main skills, and a lesser bonus to minor skills, and both lots will increase faster then other skills. Different factions (theives guild, for example) will require you to have reached a certain level with certain skills, and this requirement is higher as you advance in the faction. As far as reputation goes when you commit a crime you get a bounty of sorts - the next time you see a guard they will fine you the amount that your bounty is and take any stolen items you have. Alternatively you can resist arrest (guards will then attack you) or go to jail in which case you loose skill points. Reputation its self is seperate from this, and it increases depending on what you do. So this allows for you to be an infamous outlaw, or a hero, and the skills allow you to do pretty much anything you want.

That turned out a bit longer then I expected, but anyway I think this is a great way to have things done if there arent any set classes etc.

The problem is that many characters would eventually end up like each other, having taken the most advantageous course at every turn. Disadvantages would be harder to implement. Could be done, though.

Its not as much of a problem as you might think (done the way TES does it at least) because for the most part all the skills are equal. Of course as most games are mostly combat-based then combat skills are the most useful, but the other skills are equally so.

Edited by Tom, 14 December 2004 - 01:54 PM.

[Schatten]

sorry, my mistake. i didnt mean classes, i ment faction as in gothic. so lets say you join a faction like a monk faction and do monk quests then paladin faction dont like you. practical a different way of alignment.
though i havent played it i only heard in fable the people actually see by the looks you are a bad guy and dont treat you good. or the visual effects of kotor when becoming corrupt is good. this is a good way of doing it.

edit: to tell the truth i like this leveln as it is done in morrowind and dungeon siege more than this straight steps. it feels more real somehow.

Edited by Schatten, 14 December 2004 - 03:07 PM.

[fallen_demon]

Don't like alignment. Would rather do what I feel fits the character without being judged good or evil. I liked it in KOTOR as an exception b/c of the lightside/darkside plot/setting focus. IMO the way fable does it isn't a good thing, as I would like to play a charismatic bad guy who isn't despised by everyone and could get married and get people to my side.

[Archmage Silver]

Well, my chars are usually chaotic neutral, so that I can do what I want without the alignment restriction of the good and evil alingments. Lunatics and madmen hehe!

[Archmage Silver]

Heh heh. The reason why I play Chaotic Neutral chars is that paladins and i.e chaotic evil fighters usually just did what was due to their alignment. Well, I thought that it wasn't too interesting and tried a Chaotic Neutral mage, and there! That was interesting and I got the best dialogue options too.

[fallen_demon]

Am I the only one who finds alignment restrictive to rp'ing. By all means, if a Paladin does something against their code make them fall, but other characters may consider that the right thing to do, but thats different. Too many computer/video game rpg's seem to focus on the struggle between good and evil in the main character. I'd like to decide upon a character and do what I see fit for them, without worrying if I'm being judged as good or evil enough. Yes you can powergame through a game with no alignment, but you can do it with alignment too, especially non-static alignment, and a character that cannot change just sucks.

[Archmage Silver]

Ya, but NWN for instance didn't have much of a trouble with the alingment since it changed according to the player's actions. Heh, I admit that it wasn't too good, but it was a start.

[Schatten]

hm.... somehow.... you need to be judged by others. when you go to a city and bomb it and then go to a neighbouring city they must judge you as a killer and tread you badly. perhaps a number as judgement is not good. perhaps a feat"?? is better. when you kill the king you get the feat "king killer". something like fallout has done. so you can then create reactions based on these facts. also you see a nice list when looking at your char sheet.

[Archmage Silver]

I don't think that they should implement feats for different courses of action. Perhaps the NWN alignment system would work if the NPCs could really react to the changes of your alignment i.e they wouldn't like a graverobbing paladin very much (graverobbing decreasing alignment to more evil).

[Schatten]

sorry. i didnt mean a feat like cleave. its more of a "flag". remember when you marry that dude in fo2? you get this flag that you were married. cant remember what those things were called. they are just global flags. though its very complicated and work intense to make an alignment system with that. nevertheless it opens lots of dialog options, too.

[Archmage Silver]

I don't think that killing a person when no one else sees you should give a status of anything.

[Archmage Silver]

Well, if a rogue backstabs someone and changes to invisible (i.e by using a ring of invisibility) before anyone comes to see what's wrong, do you think he should get any changes to reputation? To alingment surely, but to reputation? Other npcs don't know he did anything.

[Gaias]

The whole concept of "alignment" should be scrapped from crpg's altogether. We can think all we want about what is good or bad, but our own thoughts will amount to nothing if others do not think the exact same way as we do. It is ultimately the perception of others that determines if we are "good" or "evil". Game devs gotta think about making a more responsive and dynamic reputation system that changes and evolves with every action and reaction you make thoughout the game. I would like to see more of a morale system than the tried and failed alignment system. Maybe give a list of morale choices that the pc would most likely follow, and the pc could be given dialog options and reputation flags based upon the "morales" that he choose for himself.

Hope that make some sense. Just some random thoughts on the subject ....

[Shed]

I think it harsh to describe alignment as "failed". It has its flaws, but as a concept it is still useful. On the whole, ideas of good and evil have a lot of overlap from person to person.

Here's an idea:
characters start off at true neutral (or equivalent) alignment. The player can roleplay however he wants, and the char's alignment changes over the course of the game to reflect the player's actions. Like NWN, chaotic/lawful and good/evil points are gained by performing certain actions.

However, this does not affect the char's standing and reputation. The character has a different reputation for every major group or city/area. Performing more political, or apparantly good/evil acts will affect reputation and how the character is treated.

For example, if a character confesses to a crime he did not commit in order to save a young child, his reputation will fall, but he will move towards a good alignment.