[PnP] Alignment troubles

Alex Koponen akoponen at mosquitonet.com
Fri Oct 14 19:09:45 CEST 2005

My take on alignments is that an aligned creature doesn't NEED to attack 
opposed aligned creatures - but would if they thought there was ANY 
advantage to it. Likely to attack if they think they would win. They 
might ignore most non-opposed creatures unless they thought there 
definitely was advantage to attacking it (example: food).

Most Elder (Sidh and Dwarves) respect tradition. To take a 
non-traditional magic path (or even demonstrate skill with a 
non-Elder/Sidh spell) would be to acquire a social stigma that 
effectively would reduce one's station. Plus they would have difficulty 
in finding teachers and the probablility that their magic is already 
what is best suited for their race(s). Also, they may be displeasing 
their gods by going non-traditional routes. Highly discouraging if they 
believe that magic comes from gods.

Humans are a special case. They are gifted with choice. They can choose 
an alignment - if they choose at all. All magic paths require 
alignments. In the case of some humans they have chosen several 
alignments. Druids (Elder Wizards) have both wizard and magician spells, 
this takes 2 apprenticeships. Shaman can become Elder Wizards and 
include shamanic spells in the mix but takes 3 apprenticeships. Those 
with multiple alignments have to take care to violate neither alignment.

Human priests are subject to more restrictions than wizards. They have 
to obey the strictures of the religion in order to keep their station or 
to advance. If the religion allows it they may learn a magic path of the 
same alignment.

I expect a dwarf would only be a shadowweaver if they had rolled the 
special event Shadow Powers.


----- Original Message ----- 
From: <roghainmod at chello.nl>
To: <pnp at abroere.xs4all.nl>
Sent: Friday, October 14, 2005 4:25 AM
Subject: [PnP] Alignment troubles

> Greetings all,
> Long time lurker but making some noise due to a new set of players 
> asking complicated questions I never thought of before.
> I have trouble with the use of alignments for PCs. First, let me try 
> and explain what I think is what the rules say, then post the 
> questions arising from my understanding.
> As far as I see it, PCs only have alignment when the roll a certain 
> special event (Fanatical Power, for instance) or if they are 
> non-human - elves and faerry being elder (sidh) and dwarfs elder. 
> Magic users do not have alignments but have orientations, which are a 
> less stringent form of alignment. A PCs wizard with chaos orientation 
> does not NEED to attack law aligned forces on sight, a chaos aligned 
> creature DOES attack law forces on sight.
> So, here come the questions:
> 1) Elves, faerry and dwarfs cannot be wizards because their alignments 
> would conflict with the orientation? Same with shamans, then?
> 2) Once trained as a shaman, a PC cannot also be a wizard due to 
> conflicting orientations?
> 3) What about the various priests - I would assume their orientation 
> should be like the deity they revere? But the rules seem to only 
> mention alignment when on the subject of priests - they have alignment 
> NOT orientation - are priests supposed to act like any creature with 
> such an alignment? Can a priest also be a wizard or shaman or sidh 
> magician?
> 4) Can dwarfs only be runemasters or is it possible to be (say) 
> shadowweavers?
> Enough already.
> Thank you for your time,
> Rob
> _______________________________________________
> pnp mailing list
> pnp at abroere.xs4all.nl
> http://abroere.xs4all.nl/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/pnp 

More information about the pnp mailing list