One of the most common complaints about the modern games industry is the moral choice system: "Why do I have to either take the cat out of the tree for free or burn the motherf**ker to the ground?" However, tabletop games have produced a much more nuanced moral system (in the form of D&D alignment from Advanced to 3rd edition), and the games industry should gleefully pillage it
So we're all on the same page:
This could be a hidden system in the game that has the various factions judge you along the two axes of Good/Evil and Law/Chaos, and decides how they react to you accordingly.
For instance, if you consistently chose evil actions, evil organizations (gangs, cults, etc.) would seek you out to hire your skills. If you were lawful, then the lord might use you sparingly as a mercenary that he disagrees with but can expect to do the assigned task, while the evil organizations would compete with each other to hire you as a loyal servant.
On the other hand, if you were good, then the citizenry (neutral good) would approve of most of your actions, and they would help you out. However, if you were also chaotic, you might fall in with a Robin Hood-esque band, and the guards (though also good aligned) would be under orders to keep you away from the towns. Meanwhile, the Big Bad would seek to manipulate you by convincing you that certain evil actions will have good results.
What do you think, Escapists? does it sound like a good idea, rather than the traditional bipolar system? DO you know any games that are already using this system?
EDIT: GOOD AND EVIL ARE NOT ARBITRARY. It seems like a lot of people are unfamiliar with the system D&D uses, and are saying that you can't truly have good and evil choices. However, 'Good' is just a euphemism for altruism, and 'Evil' is one for selfishness. The game would not have to announce that choices were 'good' and 'evil', they could use other terms which would have the same effect. For instance, if you were known to be 'evil', it's unlikely that people would ask you to recover their priceless family heirlooms, as you might steal them.
As a side note, I do appreciate the amount of effort that would go into programming all these choices, but after witnessing Skyrim's "read every single book in the game" it seems that developers are beginning to understand how to produce large games with great depth. (I know it's not a perfect analogy, but you catch my drift).
So we're all on the same page:
Law vs. Chaos
The law versus chaos axis in Dungeons & Dragons predates good versus evil in the game rules. In esoteric Greyhawk setting lore, too, the precepts of law and chaos predate good and evil in the world's prehistory. Players often consider law and chaos less relevant to their character than good and evil. Confusingly, a lawful alignment does not necessarily mean that a character obeys a region's laws, nor does a chaotic alignment necessarily mean that a character disobeys a region's laws.
The third edition D&D rules define law and chaos as follows:
Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.
Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has a normal respect for authority and feels neither a compulsion to follow rules nor a compulsion to rebel. They are honest but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others if it suits him/her.
It is more common for creatures to be neutral with regard to law/chaos than good/evil. Certain extraplanar creatures, such as the numerous and powerful Modrons, are always lawful. Conversely, Slaadi are chaotic, representing beings of chaos. Dwarven societies are usually lawful, while Elven societies are most often chaotic.
Good vs. Evil
The conflict of good versus evil is a common motif in Dungeons & Dragons and other fantasy fiction. Although player characters can adventure for personal gain rather than from altruistic motives, it is generally assumed that the player characters will be opposed to evil and often fight evil creatures.
The third edition D&D rules define good and evil as follows:
Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
Evil implies harming, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient or if it can be set up. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some malevolent deity or master.
People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships.
Paladins, altruistic heroes and creatures such as angels are considered good aligned. Villains and violent criminals are considered evil, as are inherently evil creatures such as demons and most undead. Animals are considered neutral even when they attack innocents, because they act on natural instinct and lack the intelligence to make moral decisions.
The law versus chaos axis in Dungeons & Dragons predates good versus evil in the game rules. In esoteric Greyhawk setting lore, too, the precepts of law and chaos predate good and evil in the world's prehistory. Players often consider law and chaos less relevant to their character than good and evil. Confusingly, a lawful alignment does not necessarily mean that a character obeys a region's laws, nor does a chaotic alignment necessarily mean that a character disobeys a region's laws.
The third edition D&D rules define law and chaos as follows:
Law implies honor, trustworthiness, obedience to authority, and reliability. On the downside, lawfulness can include closed-mindedness, reactionary adherence to tradition, judgmentalness, and a lack of adaptability. Those who consciously promote lawfulness say that only lawful behavior creates a society in which people can depend on each other and make the right decisions in full confidence that others will act as they should.
Chaos implies freedom, adaptability, and flexibility. On the downside, chaos can include recklessness, resentment toward legitimate authority, arbitrary actions, and irresponsibility. Those who promote chaotic behavior say that only unfettered personal freedom allows people to express themselves fully and lets society benefit from the potential that its individuals have within them.
Someone who is neutral with respect to law and chaos has a normal respect for authority and feels neither a compulsion to follow rules nor a compulsion to rebel. They are honest but can be tempted into lying or deceiving others if it suits him/her.
It is more common for creatures to be neutral with regard to law/chaos than good/evil. Certain extraplanar creatures, such as the numerous and powerful Modrons, are always lawful. Conversely, Slaadi are chaotic, representing beings of chaos. Dwarven societies are usually lawful, while Elven societies are most often chaotic.
Good vs. Evil
The conflict of good versus evil is a common motif in Dungeons & Dragons and other fantasy fiction. Although player characters can adventure for personal gain rather than from altruistic motives, it is generally assumed that the player characters will be opposed to evil and often fight evil creatures.
The third edition D&D rules define good and evil as follows:
Good implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.
Evil implies harming, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient or if it can be set up. Others actively pursue evil, killing for sport or out of duty to some malevolent deity or master.
People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing the innocent but lack the commitment to make sacrifices to protect or help others. Neutral people are committed to others by personal relationships.
Paladins, altruistic heroes and creatures such as angels are considered good aligned. Villains and violent criminals are considered evil, as are inherently evil creatures such as demons and most undead. Animals are considered neutral even when they attack innocents, because they act on natural instinct and lack the intelligence to make moral decisions.
This could be a hidden system in the game that has the various factions judge you along the two axes of Good/Evil and Law/Chaos, and decides how they react to you accordingly.
For instance, if you consistently chose evil actions, evil organizations (gangs, cults, etc.) would seek you out to hire your skills. If you were lawful, then the lord might use you sparingly as a mercenary that he disagrees with but can expect to do the assigned task, while the evil organizations would compete with each other to hire you as a loyal servant.
On the other hand, if you were good, then the citizenry (neutral good) would approve of most of your actions, and they would help you out. However, if you were also chaotic, you might fall in with a Robin Hood-esque band, and the guards (though also good aligned) would be under orders to keep you away from the towns. Meanwhile, the Big Bad would seek to manipulate you by convincing you that certain evil actions will have good results.
What do you think, Escapists? does it sound like a good idea, rather than the traditional bipolar system? DO you know any games that are already using this system?
EDIT: GOOD AND EVIL ARE NOT ARBITRARY. It seems like a lot of people are unfamiliar with the system D&D uses, and are saying that you can't truly have good and evil choices. However, 'Good' is just a euphemism for altruism, and 'Evil' is one for selfishness. The game would not have to announce that choices were 'good' and 'evil', they could use other terms which would have the same effect. For instance, if you were known to be 'evil', it's unlikely that people would ask you to recover their priceless family heirlooms, as you might steal them.
As a side note, I do appreciate the amount of effort that would go into programming all these choices, but after witnessing Skyrim's "read every single book in the game" it seems that developers are beginning to understand how to produce large games with great depth. (I know it's not a perfect analogy, but you catch my drift).
