Tabletop Moralities

>being this autistic

TGT is about 500 pages long and not finished yet, you would have to go on an emotional rollercoaster to find out

Baseless claims that something that didn't exist before is what was wrong with the alignment system. Care to explain?

>Wanting Moderation
>Autistic

okay, so I've seen these pictures a lot but what the fuck exactly IS TGT? Is this from here? Or is it some kind of /co/ thing?

OP, didn't you know? Veeky Forums is fucking useless and will never actually help with anything.

I've always wondered why there is so much "straight" porn which focuses so much on the cock that the title may as well be "Fap to this Cock, with special guest A WOMAN", it is especially noticeable with oral porn, where half the time the woman is clothed.

>Something that didn't exist before
Is this some sort of ohsee donutsteel shitposting thread or do you actually want input on how to make the alignment system less terrible?

His death and Tom's shock was probably the third most depressing thing. Then the weed party.

starts off as an ironic sonic comic that escalates to insane levels and turns out to actually be extremely well-written and full of meta commentary, the author manages to juggle a huge roster of characters with their own motivations and reasoning all separated in many group-arcs that intertwine and affect eachother fluently

there's a download here
mega.nz/#!WwdCQJrJ!vtvtKf326HbAh9BxoV341cv-bmDyY4Qpx9EF1DsIIGE

>tfw there's not nearly enough shemale on female porn, and what little there is is almost exclusively manfaced tranny whores and poorly lit, poorly shot, poorly edited fetish shit
For real though, why is this not more common? It's all the best parts of straight lesbian porn in a single place.

>Comes to Veeky Forums to ask for help
>Offended at the first implication that he isn't a genius that fixed 30 years of complaints against alignments all by himself with 5 minutes in MS Paint
Never change.

Read up on real systems of ethical philosophy, apply accordingly.

Kantian categorical imperative, utilitarianism, Aristotelian virtue ethics, nihilism, Ayn Randian objecivist selfishness, Nietzschean ubermench ethics, Christian divine command theory... There are more than enough ideas out there to flesh out a character.

And it's not even like the guy the cock is attached to is attractive. If I wanted to look at some ugly piece of shit I'd jack it in the mirror

I've seen this happen several times.

I once saw some guy get buttravaged when people in the thread asked him to clarify his question.

The law/chaos axis in this chart doesn't make sense.

It's entirely possible to be rebellious and lawful, and as well as chaotic and social.

I personally don't understand the distinction between "Lawful" and "Social".

Does a Lawful Good person do things for the betterment of Law and a Social Good person do things for the betterment of People? Isn't Lawful Good already the "Social Contract" alignment by default?

All OP has really done is obfuscate alignments and Lord knows we don't need that.

I don't want your input on the fucking system. I want character examples. Read the fucking post.

Except I'm not asking for reviews on my system. It works just fine for me. I just need examples for the guide I'm making.

Law =/= The right thing
Law = Law
The right thing = The right thing

>Give me examples for characters' alignments on my new, even more convoluted alignment matrix when everyone knows Veeky Forums can't agree with this shit even with a normal matrix
I honestly can't even tell whether this is a troll thread or just a normal shitposting thread.

I think you're supposed to imagine that it's your cock.

Lawful = Follows the law of the land.
Social = Does what he thinks is best for the people
Neutral = Does neither
Rebel = Acts in self-interest only
Chaotic = Does fucking whatever. Literally mentally insane.

Good = Good guy. Boy scout
Moral = Generally good person, but they're not a fucking boyscout.
Neutral = Average joe. Flaws.
Impure = Petty rulebreaker. Steals. Murders/etc.
Evil = Intentionally makes others suffer and enjoys it

How fucking hard was that?

People aren't going to give you examples for a system this flawed and poorly-explained. They're gonna ask for clarification and provide critique first.

Sometimes you just have a bad idea user. No need to get mad.

So moral and impure are just extra shades of gray in a system that didn't need it, social is an extraneous attribute and not part of the order-chaos continuum, and rebel is just another shade of gray on the good-evil continuum.

And really? Murder is just petty rule breaking for you? You might want to seek help from a medical professional.

>It works just fine for me

But it doesn't work for us, OP. And we're the ones you're asking for help

A character on the impure level of the spectrum does it because it's necessary. A character on the evil level of the spectrum does it because he enjoys it.

>Unnecessary shades of gray
So I'm either entirely indifferent to societal norms or I'm fucking crazy? I need a place between neutral and chaotic.

>Rebel = Acts in self-interest only
that's what "evil" means, not chaotic

Maybe if you didn't interpret "Chaotic" as Joket-tier insanity and nothing else you wouldn't be in that position in the first place.

Why make this needlessly complex list when just about every alignment you mention falls pretty evenly in the 3×3 grid?

Why use Alignments at all if you're not playing D&D?

>Having to re-align all the various monsters to make up for the expanded chart
>Having to make additional planes for all the new alignments

No, you are what you are, and what you are is described as being neutral or evil or whatever depending on how far you are from your reference point.

This is a textbook case of failing to properly play your alignment and instead letting your alignment play you.

Then what is someone who does sadistic things for their own pleasure? Someone who sets people on fire just to watch them burn?

Then how does one express joker-tier action in morality? Because it does exist. I use alignments to make sure players stay in character and don't ruin the fucking campaign immersion.

>Re-aligning other people's elements for a homebrew system
Riiiiight.

>Go to Plain of Social Moral
>It's all a bunch of grade school teachers

>Go to Plain of Chaotic Impure
>it's all a bunch of mall goths

>for their own pleasure
Sounds like self-interest and disregard of other people's needs and desires to me. That gets filed under Evil.

>Then how does one express joker-tier action in morality?

The Joker is Chaotic Evil. This is one of the few applications of alignment to a fictional character which basically no one questions. I've never seen anyone argue he's anything else other than MAYBE Neutral Evil

>I use alignments to make sure players stay in character and don't ruin the fucking campaign immersion.

Oh so you use it as an excuse to dictate how players should act? I can't stand GMs like you. It's one thing to say the Paladin falls when he does something genuinely Evil. But are you gonna punish me if my Chaotic Good rogue steeps to extorting someone? Just make them change their Alignment and move on.

So what you're telling me is that Joker-Tier insanity and cruelty is Chaotic Evil, but if you're playing a calm antihero in self-interest it's still Chaotic Evil.

Chaotic good extorts. Chaotic is on the legal spectrum. From Lawful to Chaotic. They can extort someone for their purposes. IE - Batman is Rebel Good and is willing to extort. I permit alignment changes when it makes sense with the character. I don't actively punish character breaks unless it makes no sense. Like, a Rebel Moral character may stoop once to theft if it is extremely tantalizing because it's only one or two dimensions away from the current character morality.

>Joker-Tier insanity and cruelty is Chaotic Evil
Yes.
>a calm antihero in self-interest it's still Chaotic Evil.
Evil, maybe. It depends on whether he considers other people's needs just to be less important than his own, or irrelevant. Taking a beggar's food because you don't feel like cooking is solidly evil. Refusing to share your own meal with a beggar because you were counting on eating the leftovers tomorrow probably isn't.

Nothing you've described there is chaotic.

My brain is so full of fuck right now. I don't... I want to download that whole damn comic, but I'm not sure I could handle it.

Again, all this sounds like is you just pigeon-holing your players to a bunch of extremely narrow interpretations of morality. It's not this cut and dry, where every kind of personal moral philosophy fits into one neat little square. This is a problem with the standard 3x3 as well. But at least in that case each Alignment is fairly broad and tolerates a good amount of interpretation.

If you're not using D&D there is absolutely no reason to use Alignment. Alignment works--and even then only barely--in that system because it ties into a system of metaphysics. Magic is integrated into the Alignment system and since magic is a major facet of D&D, you can't really remove it without extensive homebrew.

If you aren't playing D&D, don't force Alignment on players.

>Again, all this sounds like is you just pigeon-holing your players to a bunch of extremely narrow interpretations of morality.
No, that's what you're doing. The alignment matrix works by looking at what and why a character does things, then giving him an alignment based on that. You're trying to use the alignment matrix to determine how your character should act.

Instead of saying "you can't do that, you're evil!", You should stop and look at your character each session to see what he did, what his motivations were, what the results were, and how all those things might affect his or her actions in the future. Then determine what your character's current alignment is, and if that's different from before, it gets changed.

But why should I even bother keeping track of this alignment if the system doesn't actually require it?

You're making your players police themselves through meta-gaming.

And by the way, retroactively applying some narrow definition of morality to all of their actions is still pigeon-holing. Value judgement really should be independent of some kind of autistic grid. A grid you seem to intent on communicating by pointing to a space on the chart and saying "Yeah, and through his actions Borimir best represents this alignment".

>I use alignments to make sure players stay in character and don't ruin the fucking campaign immersion.
See, but the examples you gave in are so narrow that it's effectively impossible to roleplay anything without "breaking the immersion."

>I thank the farmer for his generosity and pocket his payment.
No user, you have to refuse payment.
>What? Why? I saved his whole family, GM.
But accepting payment is Lawful Moral, you're Social Good so you have to put the good of the people above all.
>But I just want to get paid--
Give the money back or you'll fall from your alignment and lose your paladin powers!

Best alignment system I've seen yet, that is if you insist you need to use one...

tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/BlueAndOrangeMorality

>"Bacon" and "Necktie" are Alignments

Its just dumb people thinking lolrandom is funny
>We need to explain morality that seems completely incomprehensible to normal people
>Lets make an alignment chart but add a new axis for something different
>What about bacon and necktie, that's so random LOL

>raging debates over 9 categories
>No one can truly decide where any action falls
>This motherfucker ups the difficulty before anyone is finished.

What's your problem, user?

at first it looks that it just retarded fan fiction, then it becomes the best shonen ever wrote

This is a stupid chart, and you should feel stupid for making and/or using it.

If you can't think of examples for the categories, the categories probably need some work.

>This motherfucker ups the difficulty before anyone is finished.

I found this line really funny for some reason.

But yeah, that's exactly what OP did, then came and asked us to give him fictional characters who fell into his categories. And then got mad when we couldn't make heads or tails of it

here I fixed it. I hope your happy you fucking triggered me with this shit I just spent like 5 minutes of my worthless life fixing this horrible mess. Why the fuck was Sonic lawful good he is anything but lawful the fucker runs on the highway and races racecars like he is a chaotic turd monkey and how the fucking fuck is Silver, Silver the fucking time travelling hedgehog chaotic good? The fucking tool got played hard by Mestophiles who tricked him into believing that Sonic caused the end of the fucking world. And Shadow being chaotic evil? Wtf that guy is just another lawful dipshit who believes he will deliver justice upon the world for their sins he is literally edge incarnate but the fucker follows evanescense religiously and if that isn't lawful I don't fucking know what is. Why is tails so fucking sad bro. Elevate that squirrel. Also mario is fucking so close to neutral? what? you idiot he's super good. Also trollface less chaotic evil than the cheetohs guy? Do you even cheetohs. That guy is just trying to sell you drugs. Nothing evil about that. Robotnik was p'good. Also hello kitty is like the devil. And Kermit is jesus. Fucking check your priveledge you dumb triggering fuck.

...

Love how Luigi is still CE

If you want a real homebrew moral system, just invent "virtues" instead and give people myers-briggs-eqsue profiles, or just assign points to them like a game.
>compassion/callousness
>honor/trickery
>humor/seriousness
>generosity/greed

Etc. You could probably do hundreds if you really thought about it.

"Sigh."

Proxy Paige with she-male. I literally just found this out today. Wasn't even looking for it.

Why even bother with a morality grid at all? Its never made sense to me, and if you need it to make your players play their character better then you all need to re learn how to roleplay

What? I don't see Luigi anywhere on there.
Do you mean Mr. L?
I know they get mixed up a lot.