mte@busch.UUCP (Moshe Eliovson) (06/27/85)
What?! No news. We should be ashamed of ourselves! Well, here's
a question for you all:
I was in a situation where a little man in a flower was talking.
If I paid attention even a little, no saving throw. The saving
throw was, now get this, 2d20 vs Int or change alignment to N.
Now the DM ruled a loss of 1 level. To return through clerical
repentance etc no loss (to return to previous alignment that is).
Questions:
1) Should a level loss (xp) be charged in such a case - my knowledge
is that the loss applies only to a pc changing his habits, NOT traps!
2) From N is there really a charge to go to LN, NG, CN or NE?
Ultrachaos Incarnate,
Moshe Eliovson
{allegra, ihnp4}!we53!busch!mte
robert@fear.UUCP (Robert Plamondon) (07/02/85)
In article <438@busch.UUCP>, mte@busch.UUCP (Moshe Eliovson) writes: > > What?! No news. We should be ashamed of ourselves! Well, here's > a question for you all: > > I was in a situation where a little man in a flower was talking. > If I paid attention even a little, no saving throw. The saving > throw was, now get this, 2d20 vs Int or change alignment to N. > > Now the DM ruled a loss of 1 level. To return through clerical > repentance etc no loss (to return to previous alignment that is). > > Questions: > 1) Should a level loss (xp) be charged in such a case - my knowledge > is that the loss applies only to a pc changing his habits, NOT traps! > 2) From N is there really a charge to go to LN, NG, CN or NE? > > Ultrachaos Incarnate, > Moshe Eliovson > {allegra, ihnp4}!we53!busch!mte > The real solution is to punch the DM repeatedly in the mouth. But you had your chance, and you blew it, so I guess I'll answer your question. AD&D rules are essentially worthless in situations like this (and in most others :-) ), so let's drop back ten and punt. What does all this mean in "real-world" terms? If listening to the creature caused a radical personality change, then your character has been *POSESSED*, and needs to be deprogrammed/exorcised/whatever. No level loss, unless the cure causes damage itself. Next question... -- -- Robert Plamondon {turtlevax, resonex, cae780}!weitek!robert
ekblaw@uiucdcs.Uiuc.ARPA (07/04/85)
I suppose the situation would depend on the man in the flower and your
previous alignment. For instance, if the man in the flower was considered
evil and you were good, I could see where listening to him would be
against your alignment, thus constituting a punishment of one experience
level. (Note: Most people would ask why this would not make a person
evil. One, it what the man is saying is not wilely evil and the listener
does nothing in response, the listener has not done too serious an action
against his/her alignment. Two, it harder to completely swing from side
of the spectrum to the other. One improper act would not warrant such
an extreme reaction.)
Obviously, it is possible to change to another alignment from neutral.
If we take the classic medieval ideal of neutrality, i.e. a sense of a
natural balance of order v. disorder and good v. evil, the character must,
in the long run, have an approximately equal number of all types of actions
(good, evil, logical, chaotic, lawful, illegal, chivalrous, disrespectful,
etc). Of course, the measurement of good v. evil, etc. is most successfully
determined by allied player characters, NPC's, and the DM, as a neutral person
would have deemed the action necessary in each case; not based on a set of
moral, ethical, or legal standpoints (that is, after all, the basis for a
TRUE absolutely neutral person). Clerical admonition is a good way to restore
one's original alignment from neutral to something else, but remember that
there are some drawbacks. One, it won't work if the person is/was an
atheist (I've run characters like that before; it gets interesting in
spell or religious situations). Two, the character would have to have been
a previous believer in the god/goddess/hero of the cleric (and if that
character is no longer a believer, it may not work and/or the cleric may
not accept him/her). [Note: if the character was originally a cleric-type
class, he/she must go a cleric of the same denomination as he/she originally.
The change in class will eliminate all previous spell/divination/admonition
capabilities.] Three, the god/goddess/hero may require a servile duty or
quest to prove the character's willingness to work in order to return to
his/her original alignment (as well as being a good form of punishment for
allowing the alignment change in the first place).
Good luck, and try to avoid such things in the future. Alignment changes are
hard on all involved; character, DM, and associates/allies.
Robert A. Ekblaw, ekblaw@uiucdcs
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign
("Don't look at me to help," said the thief. "I just steal 'em, I don't use
'em.")hutch@shark.UUCP (Stephen Hutchison) (07/06/85)
In article <438@busch.UUCP> mte@busch.UUCP (Moshe Eliovson) writes: > > What?! No news. We should be ashamed of ourselves! Well, here's > a question for you all: > > I was in a situation where a little man in a flower was talking. > If I paid attention even a little, no saving throw. The saving > throw was, now get this, 2d20 vs Int or change alignment to N. > > Now the DM ruled a loss of 1 level. To return through clerical > repentance etc no loss (to return to previous alignment that is). > > Questions: > 1) Should a level loss (xp) be charged in such a case - my knowledge > is that the loss applies only to a pc changing his habits, NOT traps! > 2) From N is there really a charge to go to LN, NG, CN or NE? > > Ultrachaos Incarnate, > Moshe Eliovson > {allegra, ihnp4}!we53!busch!mte > Well, the answer to (1) depends on the DM's excuse for the powers of the little bugger in the flower. If it drew on negative material plane then it was level-draining you as it talked, and the change in alignment is a different power operating at the same time. If it didn't draw on the negative material, then it probably shouldn't have the level-drain effect any more than a Helm of Opposite Alignment or some other magically enforced change should have such an effect. If the little bugger actually did convert players to Neutral, then (as I understand the botched attempts in AD&D to implement religions) the players would lose a level or more, as dictated by whatever their deity did to them as punishment for changing. HOWEVER: IF they were converted, then WHY would they even WANT to change back? And the penalties imposed by the Restoration would depend on the deity. For instance, the adaptation of the Norse and Greeco-Roman deities is thoroughly botched as far as attitude towards worshippers. A worshipper in these religions might have a primary patron, but no particular single deity. Around Roman times, there was great interest in the "mystery religions" (of which Christianity was one). These typically had several levels of secrets, and you could be Initiate in many at once. Only a few had any kind of exclusion. If your DM has a polytheistic world, and it is the norm for people to believe in a pantheon rather than specific deities, then it wouldn't be likely to really matter unless the conversion moved you completely away from the pantheon. As for (2), WHO KNOWS? Your DM is the arbiter, and if the pantheons and deities are jealous about worshippers, then changing alignment without changing religion would just get you in trouble with your deity. Basically, your DM needs to have a good, clear explanation and understanding of WHY alignments are there before inflicting them on you players. Most religions here in the surreal world don't have a single, clearly definable alignment on the limited scales of Law-Chaos and Good-Evil. This is complicated by the fact that the majority teach their doctrines, representing them as being, by definition, GOOD. The weakest of such assertions comes in the more esoteric Eastern religions, such as the Tao, or Zen, which don't necessarily deal with concepts which Wersterners would recognize as good and evil; such things are illusory or undefinable, but they do teach that there are correct ways to act and think, and (at least what I know of the Tao) they teach that to strive for Good is a good thing. Your DM needs to determine just how it is that people are WILLING to worship "Evil" deities, and to similarly tell what the role of Law-Chaos really is. Note that few religions on Earth Real-World have made a big deal out of these apparent opposites in any practical way. Some have made philosophic doctrines out of them but they don't really have a lot of effect on how people acted. (The Law of Judaism is the terms of an agreement between God and Man, specifically Jews, and doesn't suggest doctrinal conflict with some Chaos. It just says what to do, seldom why.) Anyway, recall that in your own campaign you don't have to adhere to the very letter of the AD&D rules, and that those rules in fact recommend that you customize this very important part of your world, rather than adopting ad-hoc a random collection of disjoint myth. Hutch