Alignment-to be or not to be?

[Ravenspath]

I prefer to use the Virtue/Vice system from nWoD and True20.

As for good/evil specific magic, I follow D20 Modern's idea of replaceing 'good/evil' with 'opponent' or 'adversary.'

 :cool:

Opponent of Advresary huh? I like that! Will have to ponder that further!

 

[amikaligula]

I cannot decide on how to play alignment in my campaign world.  In many ways, evil/good and especially law/chaos are integral to the quest, but I do buy into the relativistic moral scale.  I am intentionally blurring the difference between overzealous paladins (a bit of a redundancy with the way I've seen most people play them) and outright blackguards.  I was thinking of making every humanoid (including goblinoids) neutral but putting chaos/law bents on each race , maybe showing these bents as  a racial starting feat (thogh the majority will be neutral), while outsiders, for the most part, have a good/evil axis.  however, good/evil would still be accessible to player in the form of feats...perhaps as bonus feats which are earned by extraordinarily good/ evil acts, it occurs to me after reading this thread.  I would keep detect good/evil spell levels rather low, as they will not be that useful, usually, and move the detect law/chaos spell levels up a bit, perhaps.

I think that the above paragraph can be helpful and applicable in most campaigns, but i'm not so sure about the following, as it is more specific to my campaign.  still, i am asking for help, so i might as well try to help you to help me.

In my world, there is a brand of magic known as "Ichoric" magic, that is, "blood magic", which deals with the essence of a creature, sort of an overwhelming genetic predisposition.  Often, it has to do with an affinity of some other source of magical power (think of PHB sorcerers).  however, it can also have alignment affinities (which is why many drow are so vile, as they are ruled and shaped by sorcerers).

eh?