How would you allow (or interpret) PC 'alignment' within a Traveller rule system/campaign?

[Micky]

I do want to explore how I can “go there” in a Traveller Universe. It is part of science fiction. Some of the old questions about origins or life, superior intelligences, supernatural powers, entities that can corrupt, etc, that originally get explored in medieval settings, reappear in science and science fiction settings, because people question that, if these things do not have obvious answers on Earth, they might well be answered somewhere else in the universe. -- this is perhaps were even I find Traveller rule systems a bit "sterile" and devoid of the kind of science fiction romanticism found in Star Trek, etc.

funny.. you do ask 'how' and you sort of hit on that yourself. You would pretty much need to trash the setting and build your own. Again the biggest strength of the Traveller game. It is setting-neutral. Place it where you want and it works. Unless you are a hyper Alpha-creative hype you would presumably go with a standard alignment system based upon Law-Chaos, Good and Evil and thus would need some overarching element that creates the need for alignment other than just moral compasses for players. Funny enough the FIRST thing I thought of was something akin to the Fifth Element and its main character who was the typical Traveller character... someone who had a great time going through character creation and got skills supreme yet eventually got mustered out and now is just trying to survive and get ahead if life until events (a setting) firmly force them onto the heroic arc, the usual one of good v. evil. The needs of the many rather than the selfish one who is just an insignificant flyspec in the grand scheme of the traditional setting as the typical Traveller characters are.

 

[Limpin Legin]

So , I was asking why you felt it was needed for you (or your players)? i.e., what does it bring to the table?

I was looking for a way of bringing new and younger players to the table of the Traveller Universe. At the mo. these players only have knowledge of DnD, and haven't surveyed or tried out any other game system. These players identify with liking dark themes and, while I like Traveller very much, I cannot see a way of offering that to them. That was the point I was attempting to make in post #4, I can now see that the meaning didn't get through!!!

Anyway, my quest might now be irrelevant, as said players might skip Traveller, and explore Mork Borg for a while - that is a Sci Fi game mixed with dark fantasy themes, and players can ONLY be dark in alignment because Mork Borg is a world where good has allegedly been annihilated.

 

[ottarrus]

You know, I think I have what you might be looking for.
In MJTAS 10 there are two articles, 'Monetizing Heroism' and 'The Price of Villainy'.
Take a look and see if this is what you're after.

 

[CordwainerFish]

Attempts at closed form analysis of personalities are neither beneficial nor benign, but given Trav's literary antecedents, I would hope that if anyone handrolled one their fluff text would include the term 'rigor of colloids'.

 

[Condottiere]

Probably works better for non player characters, since it allows the dungeon master to predict their actions and reactions.

 

[G'Naakbusters]

This is entirely in the spirit of fun, of course:

Lawful Good Solomani: "The Confederation should protect and encompass all who choose to share the Solomani culture and contribute as citizens, regardless of heritage."
Lawful Neutral Solomani: "I support the Navy and the Secretariat because they deter aggression from the megacorporate-controlled, backwards aristocracy of the Imperium."
Lawful Evil Solomani: "There are racial degenerates among us. Was it not true, my "honourable" colleague, that your great-grandmother was... Vilani?!"
Neutral Good Solomani: "The Solomani culture is one I'm proud to be a part of, and we are held in esteem by many humans who have lost sight of their roots."
True Neutral Solomani: "Honestly, all this stuff about the Cause and the Movement and the Party gives me a headache. Who cares?"
Neutral Evil Solomani: "The Confederation will keep me and my cohorts in power on our world if we voice the right slogans and make a point of applauding the Cause and praising Confederation membership."
Chaotic Good Solomani: "I don't care if you're Dolphin, Ape, or even Vegan, you're a Solomani in my eyes!"
Chaotic Neutral Solomani: "Yeah, yeah, politics, whatever cuts through all this red tape and lets me do my job is what I support."
Chaotic Evil Solomani: "Yeah, the six-eyes say it's a research station, but obviously they're up to something. That's why I blew it up."

Lawful Good Aslan: "Clan honour has been besmirched. For my ko and our Tlaukhu liege, I declare we must duel."
Lawful Neutral Aslan: "It is required that I maintain the family business. Thus I vow to never marry."
Lawful Evil Aslan: "I have carefully catalogued the potential insults against my clan, looking for the perfect justification to declare a righteous clan war now that I have built up our strength."
Neutral Good Aslan: "To learn more of honour, I have travelled in the entourage of a great warrior."
True Neutral Aslan: "The frontier beckons. I will carve out a landhold, beholden to none."
Neutral Evil Aslan: "Yeah, it was dishonourable. What do I care, I'm an outcast."
Chaotic Good Aslan: "I will fight off those slavers because they offend my sense of justice."
Chaotic Neutral Aslan: "I will fight off those slavers in exchange for land for myself and my brothers."
Chaotic Evil Aslan: "I am the slavers."

Lawful Good K'kree: (Male) member of the Great Herd who knows its correct place.
Lawful Neutral K'kree: Strange quasi-loners that we tolerate because they know how to manage the subjects and the foreign mercenaries.
Lawful Evil K'kree: The Lords of Thunder. They want to exterminate G'naak, as the ancient law says, but they disavow the Steppelord and his modern law.
Neutral Good K'kree: Female. She stands there, looks pretty, and sometimes has a baby.
Neutral K'kree: Frightening crazy people who like to be alone.
Neutral Evil K'kree: Frightening crazy people who like to be alone and are being manipulated by Hivers.
Chaotic Good K'kree: Children. How they frolic!
Chaotic Neutral K'kree: Frightening crazy people who spend all their time with subject races and not other K'kree.
Chaotic Evil K'kree: "I slipped bacon into your salad."

 

[Geir]

Chaotic Evil K'kree: "I slipped bacon into your salad."

"...and now I must stomp on your head until your brains pour out from your shattered skull and fertilize my garden."
(Okay, maybe I should cut back on the morning caffeine)

 

[G'Naakbusters]

One does wonder how a Chaotic Evil Bwap would work.

"It was to be filed under 86741-B, but I filed it under 86741-C."

"A terrible mistake!"

"No. On purpose."

 

[Condottiere]

Lawful Neutral Terran

Chaotic Neutral Terran: Let's introduce coke to the Vilani.

 

[Limpin Legin]

You know, I think I have what you might be looking for.
In MJTAS 10 there are two articles, 'Monetizing Heroism' and 'The Price of Villainy'.
Take a look and see if this is what you're after.

That looks super. I'll follow that up later in the week. I also found this Chthorian Stars Core Setting (2011) | DriveThruRPG, which also looks the sort of thing I was after, except it only claims to be influenced by Lovecraftian themes. I could end up with both, although your suggestion is more up-to-date rule-wise, so I prefer it.

 

[CordwainerFish]

One does wonder how a Chaotic Evil Bwap would work.

Oh Yaskoydray, just imagine a Bwap practicing malicious compliance...

 

[tytalan]

If you want an alignment system for Traveller don’t look at D&D. The D&D alignment system was built around the concepts of good and evil with Michael Moorcock’s Order vs Chaos (Amber also influenced it some). A more realistic system that would fill your need would be the Palladium Alignment system
Principled (Good)
Scrupulous (Good)
Unprincipled (Selfish)
Anarchist (Selfish)
Aberrant ( Evil)
Miscreant (Evil)
Diabolic (Evil)
Instead of D&Ds Vague Good and Evil each alignment has an actual code or moral outline. For example a Principled align person Always Keeps their world while a Scrupulous will keep their world to any other good person, a Unprincipled will keep his word of honor, Anarchist keeps their word, but only if it suits or pleases them, Aberrant Always keeps their word of honor (at least to those they deem worthy), Miscreant does not necessarily keep their word to anyone, and a Diabolic Rarely keep their word, and has no honor. Each alignment has a list of 13 or 14 things that define its morality like the ones I used as an example. You’ll also notice there’s no neutral alignments that’s because there’s no such thing as neutral morality.

 

[Sigtrygg]

An Aztec priest was principled.

 

[G'Naakbusters]

An Aztec priest was principled.

Alas, an Aztec priest was G'naak, as he ate flesh. Being principled is no excuse and no salvation. Gotta be trampled, I'm afraid.

 

[Sigtrygg]

The point is that one person's principled is another person's diabolic - so the Palladium system is not much use either.

 

[G'Naakbusters]

Aim for maximum evil.

The Vilani who curses his ancestors. The Zhodani who campaigns for mental privacy. The Geonee who lets his wife walk unaccompanied in public. The Droyne who refuses to die when he's been wrong one too many times. The Gurvin who offers a discount.

Let there be no limit to your depravity.

 

[Condottiere]

A Terran who covets his neighbour's ass.

 

[Nelphine]

That's why I like the d&d alignment system, but with definitions. Note the definitions below don't have to be what you use for your game, but you should define them in some way better than the vagueness d&d 'uses'. I like the labels from d&d because they provide enough variety for new players to be able to tell the difference, without getting so nuanced that it's hard to differentiate them.

Lawful - there are those with authority* who should be listened to
Chaotic - there should not be people with authority* over others
Good - put others before yourself (except the minimal necessary to be able to continue putting others before yourself - putting your oxygen mask on before your childs is good with this definition)
Evil - put yourself before others
Neutral balance - do a mix of both (lawful and chaos or good and evil) without an obvious preference to one or the other (this is most people, on both spectrums)
Neutral apathy - do whatever on your whim (this is what those who try to denigrate chaotic usually claim is chaotic behaviour)
Neutral absence - unable to make significant choices and must instead act on set predetemined behaviors (most robots or animals fall here)

*Authority does not include experts who explain something. These experts convince you of the correctness of an action or inaction through appealing to intelligence. However, an expert who simply says 'I'm an alchemist, you must brush your teeth' is acting as an authority, not as an expert. Obviously, the line between expert and authority can become very difficult to discern. The line between chaotic and lawful can also get very blurred if the authorities usually act as experts, as that will usually extend to trusting them in a rushed circumstance. But generally if your trust in an authority must be earned individually through demonstrated expertise, then you are acting chaotically. Similarly, a chaotic person may absolutely follow laws and still be acting chaotically, but only if they fully understand the law, and see it's benefit (defined by their good/evil spectrum). A lawful person will follow the law without that understanding.

 

[Sigtrygg]

So back to the Aztec priest ripping the heart out of a slave so that the sun god is happy and the empire continues.
Lawful Good?
The priest is following the law, the priest is doing for others.

 

[G'Naakbusters]

So back to the Aztec priest ripping the heart out of a slave so that the sun god is happy and the empire continues.
Lawful Good?
The priest is following the law, the priest is doing for others.

My answer:

Applying the system from an Aztec perspective, yes. Lawful Good.

Applying the system from a perspective of a society that generally finds it ethically offensive to kill (or to have) slaves, Lawful Evil.

Applying the system from the perspective of a society that has no objections to slavery or killing slaves but has no interest either way in those Aztecs' silly superstitions, Lawful Neutral.

Of course, it only works objectively if the setting is one with a fantastical or metaphysical structure that imposes a perspective by default. If we're playing Aztec Empire: The Immersive Game, and introducing a D'n'D-style alignment system, the priest is Good ("objectively" so). In most game settings it would probably be assumed that players are generally from societies where slave-killing is opposed, and the priest would be Evil (which doesn't mean he isn't doing right and just things in his own perspective, he's just "objectively" wrong in this setting).

In D'n'D, Good and Evil are objective forces. They probably loosely correspond to most players' (likely only vaguely interrogated but probably socially functional) ideas on what is ethically praiseworthy and what is ethically suspect. Which makes it generally easy for players to buy into the mechanic. Anyone who does have a complex sense of ethics will probably theoretically take issue with some of it, but of course it's not supposed to be a philosophy seminar or a soul-searching meditation, it's a game. Personally, I find it a fascinating and quite versatile system, but of course not appropriate for more, shall we say, "grounded" settings.

I do think you could use the system to generate general character types within any given framework, though. My post above was jocular, of course, but deciding what a given Solomani, Aslan, K'kree, etc. would be like assuming they adopted the alignment chart (having been promoted to Objectively Correct) seems like it could be vaguely fruitful, or at least fun.