Scripted Alignment Changes

[Keith Mac]

I think you guys are missing the point....as a player he solved his own IG rediculous problem by using a static alignment shift against another. Neither static alignment shift should have been there in the first place. He didn't cheat or abuse the engine. The engine cheated him and his concept by making alignment shifts without knowing intent. He simply reversed the effect in an OOC way without having to bug a DM (WHich are hard to find somtimes) to help him with it. Should it have been reported...probably...both should have...but when there is no standard for alignment shifts....it will just get debated.

So look at his post in the light it was meant....static alignment shifts are completely impossible to script properly and therefore should be included in the building standards as a No NO!

[White Warlock]

I didn't miss the point at all Keith (although Brokenbone may have). Keith, i don't know anyone here personally. Unlike you, i'm not inclined to defend someone just because of friendships. I will speak for the betterment of this project, even if it hurts a few egos, or slaps a few hands. I reported plenty of bugs and player misbehaviors, and wasn't very popular for it... but it was the 'right' thing to do. Friendships are great, fine and dandy, but this is a project... and just like a job, you don't undermine the project for an increase in friendship points.

The argument that DMs aren't always available is a crock, because there is this forum where people can post their findings. There are specific threads asking for bug reports, PMs that can be sent, the chat channel, etc, etc, etc. Cynon opted to 'work around' a facet of the game he didn't like, rather than report it so it could be fixed. Maybe it wasn't designed appropriately, maybe it was, but it is not for him to make such a judgement and then exploit the bugs to bypass ingame rulings. If a particular facet of the game is bugged, then it needs to be fixed, not exploited or bypassed. Until such time as the 'managers' of the modules themselves step up and say to 'workaround' a scripted effect, it's just not okay to do so.

Moving past that, Cynon stated what needed to be said, which is that it was done horribly wrong in ALFA1 and we need to learn from our mistakes. I agree.

[ballonger]

I'm gonna stay short, possibly repeating what others have said.

My opinion is that the reason for there being points and not complete changes is exactly that you can be more or less evil for example. Regardless of wether it's scripted or handled by a DM, if you squeeze the extra gold out of a peasant for clearing his field of crows eating his crops, you get a one or two point hit. If you consort with devils or commit cold blooded murder you gain more. That's the idea or having such a wide spectra point wise in each alignment.

I have absolutely no problem whatsoever with scripted alignment hits, as long as I am given full control over my PCs actions through the dialogue options. Ie I should be given alignment hits only after I am being given a wide array of options and consciously choose one that clearly is an act of, for example, evil. I should be given the opportunity to [Lie], [Persuade], [Threaten] and come to [Insight], just like in nwn1. And more at that. Work with it, widen the array of dialogue options and I will gladly cope with my scripted alignment hits.

[Mayhem]

Well Cynon, it's not an accusation, it's a fact. Brokenbone is correct in stating that what you did with the sword was exploiting a bug, which is potentially a bannable offense.

Well, technically, it wasn't a bug. Somebody had deliberately decided that every time you took something from that box you were slipping towards chaos.

If a character who wanted to remain lawful had consistenetly taken stuff out of that box, he would have been "punished" with chaos points. Once the builder has defined the act as being chaotic, you can't really turn around and say "no, you are only allowed to get those chaos points if you actually don't want them." Either the act has been described as chaotic, or not.

My PC is far more lawful than I think justified at the moment, and I'd be tempted to do something similar to Cynon, not to "cheat the system" but simply to save the a DM the hassle of listening to my long history of recent actions in order to award me my "chaos points". When a DM is available, I like to think he has much better things to do with his or her time.

That said, I probably will do it via a DM, just to avoid the wild accusations of the petty minded (yeah, cos being more chaotic is such a powerful explit ).

[White Warlock]

Well, technically, it wasn't a bug. Somebody had deliberately decided that every time you took something from that box you were slipping towards chaos.

Umm, do you really know what the intent of the scripter was? Regardless, it was not intended to be used in the manner Cynon described.

That said, I probably will do it via a DM, just to avoid the wild accusations of the petty minded (yeah, cos being more chaotic is such a powerful explit ).

Right, self-serving motivations and not because it somehow benefits the project to point out design flaws. As to alignments, some classes are restricted by alignment, and falling out of alignment means you lose all benefits of that class, or are unable to advance in such. So, yes... it is a powerful exploit to 'use' a scripted feature for the specific intent of 'adjusting' your alignment status, as opposed to being 'in-character.'

Last, if you want to call me, or anyone else who gives a crap about this project, petty-minded because you or another opts to exploit a bug or abuse a game mechanic, rather than report the problem so it can be fixed, don't expect me to sit here and be cordial... you prick.

See how that works? Me = petty-minded... you = prick. fun, huh?

What the hell is wrong with this community that we take every friggin' opportunity to insult each other!?!? Worse, what's wrong with this community that we allow this?

[Cynon]

To be truthful i was ICly acting my alignment

To remain neutral I was doing things both lawful and chaotic, yeppers. And if those things that I was doing ICly to make my alignment change were put there by someone who scripted them because they also thought doing those things, that I was doing, should have been giving out an alignment change. Therefore by knowing my PC's alignment was neutral and that was what I was trying to be. I was doing things 'in balance' to retain 'the balance' of lawful/chaotic neutrality. Thus if you think my methods of staying neutral were OOC you believe the Scripted alignment changes were OOC and hence they shouldn't have been there, thus I would have remained neutral in anycase!

I have acted perfectly within the rules of what is decent and rule abiding within ALFA and without pissing non present DM's off on a near daily basis for approximately 2 years. The alignment changes were complained about constantly and quite honestly I may be exaggerating... possibly i just killed some thugs in waterdeep once and walked up to TLR and got my chaotic points back by nicking some swords from the 12's garrison and sort of made a bigger deal about it than it was just to make a semi ironic point of view on this thread.

You'd have to go back through 2 years of logs to check on this cos i'm not sure and it's all hazy in here. If you find anything go ban me, not that i'm really playing much in ALFA at the moment and anyhow I don't really care about any of it.

Silly people.

[ballonger]

I would rather say you were using meta info. Standing by a chest opening it and putting something in it, then close it, open it again and take the item out, AND THEN REPEAT THE PROCESS! For fscks sake..

You know, in real life I try to keep the balance as well, so if I've been polite to someone I usually go up to a complete stranger on the street and smack him in the face. That quickly becomes a lot of work if I'm kind to several persons during the course of a day. I mean, what would people think of me if I didn't go around smack as many people in the face? They'd think I was a nice guy.

The reason for taking the static in WD to round up criminals assume you do just that: You turn them in to the law, because you think that's the right thing to do. You don't even kill them. If you are, for example, playing a chaotic character, a proper anarchist, you don't take the fscking static! Because as bad as these criminals might be you despise the law so much that you rather let them go free. You can also opt to not take the static, but still kill the criminals in the street, and leave them lying there, if you're just plain evil. Anything else is being OOC, and I can honestly not see someone playing lawful doing that static for any other reason than getting the gold and xp. And that is called powergaming. Wanna see how many other offenses we can line up?

The way you put it, man.. I sure hope you really aren't playing the game like that. It sounds really bad. I sure hope I'm getting the wrong idea about you.

[Mayhem]

The reason for taking the static in WD to round up criminals assume you do just that: You turn them in to the law, because you think that's the right thing to do. You don't even kill them.

Personally, OOC and IC, I was turning them into the law for the decent amount of coin you got for it. If they'd have accepted heads instead of unconcious bodies I'd have been glad of it, since they would have been lighter to carry .

[ballonger]

That might just make you LE, not unlawful.

[White Warlock]

Cynon, i am positive nobody is going to hunt this down and make a definitive stance on your membership. You are stating what you did awhile back, and we're stating it was the wrong way to handle the issue. That's where this part of the discussion should end.

Unfortunately, you just now presented a mentality that i totally disagree with, thus i'm inclined to continue.

It is inappropriate to use ingame mechanics in a metagaming fashion to manipulate your character's faction or alignment points. If you think there's a flaw in the way something doles out alignment modifs or faction modifs, then you report it. If, on the other hand, there's no actual flaw, and you commit actions that throw your alignment off, so you run to another static that allows you to rinse-repeat (take a sword, put it back) until your alignment is back to where it used to be, then yes... you're metagaming for xp and phat l3wt. Alignment is not based merely on roleplay, but on the decisions your character makes. As such, the decisions your character makes have to have a modicum of realism. If your character takes a sword out of a box, puts it back in, takes it out again, ad-infinitum, that's not even remotely realistic... it's meta.

This thread is no longer on topic. I respectfully request we return to the topic at hand or have this thread locked.

[Keith Mac]

I didn't miss the point at all Keith (although Brokenbone may have). Keith, i don't know anyone here personally. Unlike you, i'm not inclined to defend someone just because of friendships

C'mon now dude, I take you for smarter than this...You assume I have a friendship with someone I don't know IRL, have never played with as a PC or DM. Your assumption is in full tilt. I was simply trying to prove a point about alignment shifts being scripted. They are just plain stupid. You simply can't pretent to know someones intent when they complete it. Additionally it is frusterating to listen to some of the BS being spewed forth here. Capturing criminals for XP and loot is not meta or PG-ing. A lawful, good, evil, neutral, or chaotic alignment can each have very good reason to do so, and dto do it often.

I already stated that he should have reported the bug/abusable script, but I also pointed out that the builder may not have thought it to be one. We don't have a standard for alignment shifts and therefore it boils down to personal opinion.

[ballonger]

C'mon now dude, I take you for smarter than this...You assume I have a friendship with someone I don't know IRL, have never played with as a PC or DM. Your assumption is in full tilt. I was simply trying to prove a point about alignment shifts being scripted. They are just plain stupid. You simply can't pretent to know someones intent when they complete it. Additionally it is frusterating to listen to some of the BS being spewed forth here. Capturing criminals for XP and loot is not meta or PG-ing. A lawful, good, evil, neutral, or chaotic alignment can each have very good reason to do so, and dto do it often.

And in the same spirit as you just replied, without giving any arguments at all, I will now reply to your post: You are wrong. It's stupid to think otherwise. Difference between you and most of the other posters here is that they can say just about the same thing but back it up with arguments. To just call someone dumb or insinuate they are, and just call a game mechanic stupid without actually explain why with a good founded argument.. egads..

[White Warlock]

You simply can't pretent to know someones intent when they complete it (a static).

Which is why the script for such needs to present reasonable alternatives, motives, rather than merely state "yes, i'll do it" or "no, i won't do it." And while a script cannot possibly consider all possible motives, it can at least present the more likely, which should be sufficient for most. And for the exceptions, there's a DM you can convince.

Additionally it is frusterating to listen to some of the BS being spewed forth here. Capturing criminals for XP and loot is not meta or PG-ing.

Keith, i request you reread my post. I said nothing about it being meta or PG. I stated exploiting a static, performing actions 'out of character' just to obtain the benefits associated with that static, is meta.

A lawful, good, evil, neutral, or chaotic alignment can each have very good reason to do so, and dto do it often.

A good person would not sign up to assassinate a paladin. A lawful person would not sign up to rob a blind man. There are things that some character concepts simply would not do. Alignment is a factor in this, and cannot be arbitrarily dismissed merely because the character concept decides to override pre-existing alignment. If the character concept steps out of bounds of his/her pre-existing alignment, then alignment does need to shift. How do you propose this be done? By DMed sessions only? Is it okay to step out of character whenever dealing with static quests?

I already stated that he should have reported the bug/abusable script, but I also pointed out that the builder may not have thought it to be one.

Indeed, but he didn't give the 'managers' of that server a chance to explain or reconsider, did he? Just because he didn't agree, doesn't make him right. There may have been underlying forces influencing this, possibly even deitific/demonic influences he could not have known were pulling at his soulstrings... changing who he was without his permission.

Things are not always so cut and dry, so it is essential to not arbitrarily dismiss the facets of the game. DMs very often have things happening that a player is not entitled to know, but that nonetheless influence (internal) or pose consequence (external). I'm not sure if any of you have ever played in a PnP game, but... you know... the DM calls the shots, not the players. If a DM says you're dead, you're dead. If a DM says you just became evil, you just became evil. And the game engine, the way the module is setup... that's the DM, on auto-pilot.

We don't have a standard for alignment shifts and therefore it boils down to personal opinion.

Standards are presented 'very clearly' in the 3.5 rulebooks. ALFA defines such issues specificlally to avoid relativistic debates. How to apply scripts ingame, on the other hand, are a different issue... and that's where this discussion needs to return.

[Keith Mac]

Difference between you and most of the other posters here is that they can say just about the same thing but back it up with arguments

Intent! I believe the word I used to back it up.

To just call someone dumb or insinuate they are, and just call a game mechanic stupid without actually explain why with a good founded argument.. egads..

I called no-one dumb..I just stated my opinion about scripted alignment shifts....and did so by using someone else's example here:

Capturing criminals for XP and loot is not meta or PG-ing. A lawful, good, evil, neutral, or chaotic alignment can each have very good reason to do so, and dto do it often.

Standards are presented 'very clearly' in the 3.5 rulebooks. ALFA defines such issues specificlally to avoid relativistic debates. How to apply scripts ingame, on the other hand, are a different issue... and that's where this discussion needs to return.

Well yes, of course I meant to refer to scripted alignment shifts....not the essence of alignment in general.

Things are not always so cut and dry, so it is essential to not arbitrarily dismiss the facets of the game. DMs very often have things happening that a player is not entitled to know, but that nonetheless influence (internal) or pose consequence (external). I'm not sure if any of you have ever played in a PnP game, but... you know... the DM calls the shots, not the players. If a DM says you're dead, you're dead. If a DM says you just became evil, you just became evil.

I agree with this statement and yes I have played PnP from the first incarnation.

And the game engine, the way the module is setup... that's the DM, on auto-pilot.

This I can not agree with because there is no way to know a PC's INTENT without asking him/her.

And while a script cannot possibly consider all possible motives

Exactly...let me ask you this...even if a script could come close...seriously...what is there to gain.....I just don't see the benefit from this...there needs to be some element of trust...and the countermeasure is the DM indeed.....To be clear here I don't give a rat's arse one way or the other...it won't effect me...but I can't help not seeing the point of implementing alignment shifts....they'll cause more strife then good.

Keith, i request you reread my post. I said nothing about it being meta or PG. I stated exploiting a static, performing actions 'out of character' just to obtain the benefits associated with that static, is meta.

I was not referring to your Post WW, I was referring to this one:

The reason for taking the static in WD to round up criminals assume you do just that: You turn them in to the law, because you think that's the right thing to do. You don't even kill them. If you are, for example, playing a chaotic character, a proper anarchist, you don't take the fscking static! Because as bad as these criminals might be you despise the law so much that you rather let them go free. You can also opt to not take the static, but still kill the criminals in the street, and leave them lying there, if you're just plain evil. Anything else is being OOC, and I can honestly not see someone playing lawful doing that static for any other reason than getting the gold and xp. And that is called powergaming. Wanna see how many other offenses we can line up?

[White Warlock]

And the game engine, the way the module is setup... that's the DM, on auto-pilot.

This I can not agree with because there is no way to know a PC's INTENT without asking him/her.

Intent is not the only means to determine effect. While i may have the intent of being protective, if i kill everyone getting close to my girlfriend... that's pretty dang evil. My intent was good, but my actions were evil.

It is reasonable to surmise particular actions as being evil, good, lawful, or chaotic, by the 'assumed' consequence associated with the execution of said actions. Intent, while not irrelevant, does not factor into the resulting effect. So a good person who acts on something with the assumption he is doing something good, but then finds out his actions were actually not good, will still deal with the big smack of guilt. If he repeatedly does things with the intent of being good, but each time his actions cause the death of someone, he could very well go nuts... a clearly noted consequence of extreme alignment changes. He would have to work very hard to atone for his actions (to return his alignment to its original state), however his intent may have been. It may indeed happen that he accepts fate and redefines those deaths as events he subconsciously intended. I.e., he accepts being evil.

The context at which you are perceiving alignment is entirely superficial; but alignment, as presented in DnD, is not. Intentions do not denote right and wrong, they only denote assumption. And if someone assumes incorrectly, an unintended consequence ensues. In fact, it is this very same facet of alignment that poses the intrigue of gothic novels... where well intentioned people are turned and eventually embrace malevolent deeds.

If you ever get the chance, there are some excellent writings of this in the Ravenloft campaign books.