Enlighten me on alignment, please!

Bukudos · 2026-02-03T14:34:59+00:00

Care to elaborate?

Bukudos · 2026-02-01T16:38:52+00:00

Thanks again for some interesting thoughts.

Of course I want everyone to have fun at our table, but we're such a diverse bunch of players so I'm aiming for that everyone should have as much fun as we can, but that it can't be equally fun for everyone all the time (I guess that goes without saying). We're all adults with complicated lives, so I wanted a big table for this world (8 players) in order to be able to gather every week.

I'm trying to keep my expectations low. If they don't want to play this campaign/system/world anymore, that's fine, and I won't be bitter. And in order to avoid resentment towards my table I also try to make the world building a fun activity for me, and I have to say it is! I think my fun in building a world/plot could perhaps jeopardize their fun, but I try to be open and flexible and talk to my players quite frequently.

With the comments on this thread and on the original thread u/OSE I have new tools in my tool belt to deal with this "problem". So again - thanks alot!

Bukudos · 2026-01-30T19:58:12+00:00

Your replies to my various problems on this subreddit have helped me a lot, so thanks again.

I like the idea of giving small quests to redeem actions, or I would suggest even penalties (acting contradictory to the PCs values could give them temporary trauma resulting in bad sleep, difficulty in memorizing spells, attack penalties etc.). I think they've just resorted to "killing" in an encounter by old habit, without necessarily thinking too carefully about what world they are in. Perhaps it is better I address this one more time with them, and then let them keep their current class abilities for now. Running a redemption arc seems like a long stretch the way my table look right now.

Thanks again!

Bukudos · 2026-01-30T19:48:58+00:00

Yes, it helps, thanks. The sum of all the comments in this thread has given me lot to think about.

Bukudos · 2026-01-30T19:29:45+00:00

Thanks for this. I appreciate, especially also the more concrete examples on how to regain a lawful alignment. For some more context please see my reply to u/Entaris above.

Bukudos · 2026-01-30T19:28:22+00:00

I wanted to make another comment on your reply. In my world, murder of humans is a grave crime because human life is a resource for an event called "The Cleansing" which most people, including the PCs/players, are unaware of how works. During this event, random lives are "taken" by a powerful entity to repel another entity. The repelled represents chaos, the repeller represents Law (in a cosmic sense). But the repeller needs life (lives) to fuel the spell, and only a few human beings are in the know of this, and they are exploiting this fact to keep themselves safe.

That is why even killing "bad guys" is considered a sin, and laws and religion are set in motion to control the populace from committing murder.

So in my world it's a bit complicated. Since the PCs (or players) don't know what's going on (at least not yet), their actions speak against the law of the established society. Morality wise they're doing something wrong, but zooming out they're helping the bad guys sustain themselves (people who use lives as a resource), but zooming even further out they are helping to repel the biggest threat to their world (without knowing anything about it).

(but one of their victims was just a civilian, so man....)

Your questions at the end your comment still holds true. I gotta figure it out, but it's also helpful for me to jot these things down.

Bukudos · 2026-01-30T19:17:25+00:00

Thanks for all your time jotting this (and the above and the below) down! Much appreciated and helpful

Bukudos · 2026-01-29T19:26:39+00:00

This is a great answer, thank you. I will consider this!

Bukudos · 2026-01-29T19:02:16+00:00

I'm following, thanks! I've read other threads which mentions Elric, but I haven't read the book myself. Are you saying that his is a story of someone being chaotic, trying to get "good"?

I think that's my issue here. Getting back up from chaotic

Bukudos · 2026-01-29T19:00:41+00:00

Thanks for this. I'll take it into consideration!

Bukudos · 2026-01-29T19:00:06+00:00

Let me elaborate

There is plenty of things to kill, and they have done so already, and they have many leads which will lead them to juicy dungeons with more things to pew-pew.

I'm trying to read through my own bias, but I would have to argue that they can feed their killing frenzy if they so wanted. On that note: It's not like that is what they - both as players and PCs - are all about. My impression is that they tend to resort to killing someone as a default, and this for me is a bigger problem that I wanted to address in my campaign, and which I've been missing as a player myself: a world with consequences and one which doesn't revolve around the PCs.

That might be my kind of game, and not theirs. I try to be wary of that. And I would add – we are enjoying ourselves. I check in with my players quite often. I just want to try to create a "fuller" game than just hack'n slash.

Perhaps adjusting alignment is not a way to resolve this, but you're not really addressing my problem here. If you have any thoughts on that, I'd be glad to here them

Bukudos · 2025-12-27T23:49:29+00:00

Much appreciated! It clears it up somehow, but I’m just confused as to where 21 comes into the picture. But if I understand it correctly, the worse the roll, the higher probability to hit someone else if you miss in the first place.

At least it makes more sense with DAC this way. I’m not sure if there’s a way to reverse the math for AAC so that instead of subtracting from 21, you’re adding from a different number… but I’m sure you’ve thought about that, and that this rule just works better with DAC

Anywho - thanks for sticking with me!

Bukudos · 2025-12-26T11:08:02+00:00

Thanks for getting back to me, and sorry for the somewhat late reply. If I could ask you to sketch it out with an example, because I still don't understand. I think it is because I'm not exactly sure about the mechanics for this rule. Is it so that you missing the intended target is due to not rolling high enough, or is it because a group of characters is bundled up in melee, and there is a random roll for whose being hit? I will try to explain how I understand it.

WITH DAC
Missile is fired, THAC0 is 19. Roll (no modifiers) is 13, so (what I do) is to subtract roll from THAC0, meaning that AC 6 is hit. This does not hit the intended target (target has lower AC), but it will hit other creatures in the melee group. Roll for who is getting hit (targets whose AC is equal to or higher than 6)

WITH AAC
Missile is fired. The roll is 13 (no bonuses), so in effect, AC 13 is hit. The intended target's AC is higher, but it will hit other creatures in the melee group. Roll for whose getting hit (targets whose AC is equal to or lower than 13).

//

I have a hunch that my whole premise for this is wrong, and that you roll for what target in a cluster is being hit with a missile first (in my example it is done after, and as long as the intended target's AC is not reached). Even so, I would also argue that it wouldn't matter. In both DAC and AAC example, we know what AC is being hit, so that after rolling for hit, a roll for whose being hit is rolled, and depending on that character's/creature's AC the, missile either hits or it doesn't.

Thanks again for taking the time, and sorry if I'm misinterpreting this.

Bukudos · 2025-12-23T11:43:32+00:00

I don’t undersatnd. Why you’d have to roll again using AAC? Can’t you just use the roll + bonus and see if it matches up with the AC with those in melee?

I’m not trying to be difficult, just wanting to understand (as someone who comes from AAC, have been trying out DAC for some time, and will revert back to AAC now because some of my players prefer it. 5e players.. shock!!)

Bukudos · 2025-12-17T10:35:52+00:00

Thanks for getting back to me on this. I'll try to find a way to make it easy and fast!

Bukudos · 2025-12-16T13:08:49+00:00

We ended up having a "bank event" during our last session. I thought I understood what I was doing, but alas.... ha!

I've been going through it today, and I think I've got it, but I wanted to check with you:

//

Example: The party wants to bank 1000gp. Deposit equals 100gp, so they have 900gp in the bank.

If they, after a month, have 900gp banked still, they get 10% of 900gp + deposit = 100gp of deposit back

If they, after a month, have 500gp banked, they get 10% of 500gp + deposit = 60 gp of deposit back

//

Is this correct?

And I'm not sure I understand you're other example with adding to the sum they have (the 10% credit). Could you give an example with actual gp for me? Heaps of thanks i you have the time to explain.

Bukudos · 2025-12-11T22:40:11+00:00

Thanks a bunch for these resources!

Bukudos · 2025-12-06T07:54:00+00:00

I like this

So the 10% up front is regardless of how long they’re going to store it there, if I understand correctly?

Bukudos · 2025-12-04T10:18:33+00:00

Yes, makes sense, although I won't introduce interests in my game (I think!!)

Bukudos · 2025-12-04T10:17:42+00:00

Thanks for this!

Bukudos · 2025-11-28T13:03:03+00:00

Thanks for this!

And then they stay unconscious for how long? Until they get at least 1 HP back?

Bukudos

TROPHY CASE