Palladium alignment

[Rigon]

I really like the Palladium alignment system. Has anyone used it in their non-palladium games? How did you all think it worked out in comparison to standard D&D type alignments?

R-

[Treebore]

I've only used them in RIFTS and Paladium Fantasy, but I also had thoughts of using them in other games because I also like how it is done.

[Omote]

I don't use it per se, but I have a small contingent of players in my games that essentially use the Palladium system guidelines for their alignments. Actually, I guess that does mean they use it. So yeah.

~O

[Julian Grimm]

How does the system work?

[Rigon]

How does the system work?

Here is a quick and dirty brake down of the alignments in Palladium. I don't remember where I found it. I added the "traditional" alignments in parenthesis after each one.

Palladium Style Alignments

Principled is guy who does good and never breaks the rules, never hurts innocents, and doesn't kill bad guys if he can help it. (LG)

Scrupulous is the guy who will bend the rules, rough up bad guys if he thinks it will help, but still protects innocents and avoids killing (but not to the extent of Principled). (NG)

Unprincipled wants people to be free... doesn't like rules, but takes care of people for the most part, and tends to keep his word. (CG)

Anarchist doesn't like rules, either, but mostly doesn't like them applying to him. He kills and robs if he can get away with it, and if he has to, but not "just because". (CN)

Miscreant is like Anarchist, but moreso; whereas an Anarchist might keep his word if he feels like it, a Miscreant probably won't, unless it's convenient. He'll hurt you because he wants to, and kill you because he can. (NE)

Aberrant is evil, but honorable. He'll keep his word, but if his word involves hurting you because you're trying to keep from him what he needs... (LE)

Diabolic is simply evil... killing, hurting, and taking because he can. (CE)

R-

[Lurker]

I actually prefer it to D&D RAW. The only big change is the 'neutral' alignments and no true N with it's focus on balance

Rigon, good summery of the alignment

[Rigon]

I actually prefer it to D&D RAW. The only big change is the 'neutral' alignments and no true N with it's focus on balance

Rigon, good summery of the alignment

Thanks Lurker, but I didn't write it. I found that somewheres out in the interwebs. I'm leaning toward using it, since it just seems more realistic to me.

R-

[serleran]

The only thing I like about the Palladium system in this way is the 15 point breakdown. I do not necessarily agree with them, but at least having the same situation explored from all the possible angles (for that game) makes it more clear how an individual approaches other situations.

[Keolander]

I decided not to use the standard Palladium alignments for my revamp of Robotech but instead the Revised Recon alignments (which I think Eric Wujick created). These work better, in my opinion, for the military setting.

[Lurker]

I decided not to use the standard Palladium alignments for my revamp of Robotech but instead the Revised Recon alignments (which I think Eric Wujick created). These work better, in my opinion, for the military setting.

Of all the Palladium games, I never played Recon ... what was the differences in alignments?

[Arduin]

Anarchist doesn't like rules, either, but mostly doesn't like them applying to him. He kills and robs if he can get away with it, and if he has to, but not "just because". (CN)

That would definitely be evil.

[Rigon]

Anarchist doesn't like rules, either, but mostly doesn't like them applying to him. He kills and robs if he can get away with it, and if he has to, but not "just because". (CN)

That would definitely be evil.

Not so.

R-