Thoughts on Unearthed Arcana’s new Psionics rules for D&D 5e

I think psionics is the scab that D&D can’t stop picking at.  What began as a set of optional rules from the first edition AD&D Dungeon Master’s Guide has been revisited in every edition since with varying degrees of success.  They tend to be either poorly integrated into the core mechanics, the worst offender being second edition’s Complete Psionics Handbook, or presented as simply an non-Vancian alternative magic system.  Neither approach has been very satisfying.  As magic in D&D has become more diverse with the addition of core classes like sorcerers and warlocks, psionics has had to work harder and harder to justify its existence.  Still, I am always interested in new psionics systems when they come out, so I made sure to check out the PDF.

The first thing that stuck out to me at this most recent attempt had nothing to do with the mechanics.  Rather it was tying psionics so closely to the Far Realm.  To some extent this makes sense, after all the monsters that are most likely to be psionic have always been aberrations.  Less successful to me was their attempt to explain why psionics are more common on some campaign worlds than others, which boils down to the “weirder” your campaign world is (Dark Sun, Eberron), the more influence the Far Realm will have and the more common psionics will be.  If anything this simply seemed to highlight how out of place psionics tend to be in a normal D&D fantasy setting.

As for the crunch,  these rules present the Mystic class and two orders: The Order of the Awakened and the Order of the Immortal.  These are roughly analogous to Psions and Psychic Warriors from previous editions.  The core mechanic is that a mystic has a certain number of psi points that can be spent on certain class abilities or to activate disciplines.  Your Psi points completely regenerate after a long rest, which makes book keeping easier but does little to differentiate it the way magic works in D&D 5e.  Disciplines don’t have levels but can often be manifested to greater effect by spending more points.  This used to be a mechanic that set psionic characters apart, but nowadays most spell casters use the similar mechanic of getting more bang out of their spells by casting them with higher level slots.

Of the two orders presented, I think the Order of the Immortal has more to distinguish it from the other base classes.  The class it reminds me most of is actually the magus from Pathfinder.  Both have a full range of weaponry, midrange armor, midrange hit points, and a pool of points they can spend to boost their martial prowess and enhance their weaponry.  Neither is ideal as the main fighter in a party, but both can function as an off-tank with a little extra versatility to make up for some squishiness.

Personally, I didn’t quite find enough to differentiate psionics in these rules to convince me that they are a necessary addition to the game.  It is important to note though that these are presented as an early playtest of the psionics rules, not as a finished product.  One of the things that helped make D&D 5e such a strong version of the game was the extremely open nature of the D&D Next playtest and the willingness of Wizards of the Coast to listen to player feedback.  If they follow the same template with these rules, maybe there is hope for psionics yet!

Dropping skills for backgrounds in Dungeons & Dragons Fifth Edition

I am the kind of guy who writes pages of character backgrounds for my characters.  Some of them probably qualify as short stories.  Sometimes they are written from a first person point of view, other times in the form of a journal, occasionally from a third person omniscient or the point of view of another character in the story.  I feel I need to write these backgrounds in order to properly play my character.  Even in the MMORPG City of Heroes, where I never played with deep role-players, each of my ‘toons’ had surprisingly detailed character backgrounds.

I realize not everyone plays this way.  When I am running games getting character backgrounds from some of my players is like pulling teeth.  Often players will present me with character backgrounds no more complex than “I grew up in a peasant village and when I was old enough I left to find my fortune”.  That is OK, everyone has a different playing style.

Still, I like games that encourage characters to develop their background a bit.  Probably the first game I encountered that did this was Warhammer Fantasy in which your character development was tied to your career path.  Knowing that your character was a rat catcher or a merchant before they began adventuring wasn’t much, but it was something.  Last Unicorn Games short-lived Star Trek: The Next Generation RPG took a similar path, where during character generation you would take a number of ‘tours’ on previous starships to determine your skillset.  Maybe you spent a tour on the USS Hood as a security officer even though you were in command now so you were handy with a phaser.

I think my favorite take on this mechanic so far is in 13th Age.  During character creation you allocate a number of points to backgrounds.  Rather than specific skills you might say you spent time as a cat-burglar, a guild mage, or a merchant.  Maybe you were a poacher (4 points) who was drafted as a soldier (2 points) and then became a animal trainer (2 points) when you got out.  Rather than have a specific list of skills, you roll and add an appropriate ability modifier plus points in your background where you would roll a skill check in D&D.  If the party needed to track someone through the woods and one character had a poacher background while another had a bounty hunter background, both could make the roll using their background points plus their wisdom modifier.  However, if they needed to tie up a captive probably only the bounty hunter background would be applicable.

During the D&D Next playtest, I always thought this system would be easy to implement as a house rule.  D&D Next was already more skill light than D&D 3e or D&D 4e after all.  So I was pleased to hear that at Origins there was talk of an optional module that would use backgrounds instead of skills in a similar manner.  Assuming it is well implemented, I would definitely use that option in any D&D 5e games I run.

Or I guess I could just run a 13th Age instead.  It really is a fun system.

Introducing The Critical Wounds System

I have argued in defense of healing in 4E Dungeons & Dragons in the past. It works off of the assumption that most hp damage is minor (e.g., muscle fatigue, shallow cuts, blows mostly absorbed by armor, parries, etc.), up until the hit that kills you.

This works for me, mostly because it is hit points have been an abstraction going all the way back to original D&D. After all, it is not as if a tenth level fighter was physically tough enough to be stabbed in the chest fifteen times in a row. Most of those hit points, even back then, were meant to represent the experience that allowed you to get out of harm’s way.

Still, I think with 4E D&D the pendulum may have swung a little too far the other way. While I don’t mind the majority of wounds being transient, it seems more dramatic to have enemies deliver the occasional telling blow to the heroes.

The Critical Wounds System

The Critical Wounds system is an alternative method of handling critical hits in D&D 4E. It does require a little more bookkeeping than the current system, but I believe the trade off is worth it. I will also admit that this system is in the early stages, and that it has not undergone any play-testing. I will be the first to admit that the system will probably need a little tweaking before it is ready for prime time.

The basic concept behind Critical Wounds is that there are some injuries that are simply harder to heal than others. These injuries are called “wounds”. Unlike normal hit point damage, wound damage on characters cannot be healed by powers or by using healing surges. Wounds can be healed by taking an extended rest or by the use of rituals. However, as these are life-threatening injuries, getting better is not guaranteed. After all, sometimes injuries can become infected, and even heroes can die from internal bleeding.

So enough of the fluff, let’s move on to the crunch.

Critical Hits

The current critical hit rules (where critical hits deal maximum damage) are still used for adjudicating critical hits against monsters. In this case, a monster is defined as any creature that dies at 0 hit points. The new critical hit system is only applicable to Player Characters and NPC’s with full character write-ups.

Critical Hits no longer deal maximum damage under the Critical Wounds system. Instead damage is rolled normally, but one-half of the damage (rounded down) is applied to the character’s wound total while the remainder is applied as hit point damage. Any special effects that occur on a critical hit still apply.

Wound Total

Wounds are tracked separately from hit points. While they affect the overall health of the character, they are not hit points and cannot be healed by healing surges, powers, and other effects that can heal hit points. Wound damage does count against the total number of hit points a character has, acting as a cap on the maximum number of hit points they can have.

Characters with wound damage can also suffer additional debilitating effects. When a character has wounds equal to or greater than one-quarter of his hit point total, he suffers a -1 to all defenses, attack rolls, ability checks, and skill checks. When his wounds are equal to or greater than one-half of his hit point total he suffers a -2 to all defenses, attack rolls, ability checks, and skill checks. A character with wounds equal to or greater than three-quarters of his hit point total is truly on his last legs. He suffers a -5 to all defenses, attack rolls, ability checks, and skill checks. In addition, he is only capable of moving at half-speed.

Healing Wounds

A character can attempt to heal wounds when he takes an extended rest. However, with grave injuries healing is far from assured. When the character takes an extended rest, they must roll an Endurance check (this is subject to any wound penalties the character is suffering).

The DM should then consult the Difficulty Class and Damage by Level chart (DMG p. 42. Note that the target numbers have been updated). If the character makes at least an easy success on the chart, there is no change. If the character makes a moderate success on the chart, he heals a number of wounds equal to a medium normal damage expression. If the character makes a hard success, he heals a number of wounds equal to a high normal damage expression. However, if the character fails to make an easy check, they take an additional number of wounds equal to a low normal damage expression.

It is possible for another character to use the Heal skill in place of the wounded character’s Endurance skill check. There may also be rituals in your campaign which can assist in healing wounds. I will detail one such ritual in an upcoming post.

Example in play

Almirith is a second level eladrin warlord with 27 hit points, a bloodied value of 13, and a healing surge value of 6. His party encounters a group of kobolds. During the battle, he is struck by a critical hit that deals him 11 points of damage. Almirith applies 5 points as wound damage and 6 points as hit point damage. Since 5 wounds is less than his one-quarter of his hit points, Almirith suffers no debilitating effects.

The next round he takes 6 points of additional damage, which are applied to his hit points. He is bloodied because his total hit point damage (12 hp) plus his wound damage (5 wounds) is more than his bloodied value (13). Almirith decides it is prudent to expend a use of inspiring word, which heals him 9 hit points and removes the bloodied condition.

The party dispatches the remaining kobolds and takes a short rest. Almirith takes this opportunity to expend a healing surge, which heals his remaining 3 hit points of damage. However, he is unable to heal his 5 wounds.

After travelling deeper into the dungeon, the party encounters a group of goblins. Almirith gets hit with another critical hit by a goblin hexer, dealing 9 points of damage. He takes 4 points as wound damage and 5 points as hit point damage. Since his wound damage (9 wounds) is now more than one-quarter his hit point total, he suffers a -1 to all defenses, attack rolls, ability checks, and skill checks. He is also bloodied because his wound damage (9 wounds) and hit point damage (4 hp) equals his bloodied value (13).

Almirith goes most of the rest of the battle without taking damage. He thinks his luck is improving when an enraged goblin skullcrusher manages a critical on him and rolls 15 points of damage! He takes 7 points of wounds damage (bringing his total to 16 wounds) and 8 points of hit point damage (bringing his total to 12 hp damage). 16 wounds plus 12 hp exceeds Almirith’s hit point total of 27, so he goes down.

Almirith’s luck finally does change as he rolls a 20 on his death saving throw. He is able to spend a healing surge and stands up. However, he is not in good shape. He still has 16 wounds. Since this is more than one-half his hit point total he suffers a -2 to all defenses, attack rolls, ability checks, and skill checks. Almirith is currently at 6 hit points. He uses another inspiring word and would normally heal 8 hit points. However, because of his 16 wounds his hit point total is capped at 11. This also means until he can heal some of his wounds, he is considered bloodied.  Things are not looking good for our hero. 

Still, through a combination of luck and skill he manages to survive the encounter.  His party sets up camp to take an extended rest.  Almirith rolls an Endurance skill check.  Almirith is not skilled in Endurance and has no Constitution bonus, so his roll is 1d20 - 1 (+1 from one half his level -  2 from wounds).  He rolls a 12, which is a moderate success.  Almirith rolls 1d10+3, the medium normal damage expression, for a total of 8.  This reduces his remaining wounds from 16 to 8.  Not great, but at least he doesn’t start the day bloodied. 

A quick fix for half-elves?

I feel half-elves haven’t been done right since AD&D.  Back then, half-elves were the race with the worst special abilities, but some of the best multiclass options.  At the time of the original Player’s Handbook they were the only demi-human race able to become rangers and the only half-orcs and half-elves could become clerics. 

Half-Elves maintained their position as the best race for multiclassing in AD&D 2E.  Half-Elves had nine potential multiclass combinations, which put them far ahead of elves (four combos), gnomes (three combos), dwarves (two combos), and halflings (one combo). 

Half-Elves could also multiclass as clerics, which was nearly unique.  While dwarves were allowed the cleric/fighter combo, half-elves could become a cleric/fighter, cleric/ranger, cleric/mage, and cleric/fighter/mage.  They were also the only demi-humans able to multiclass as rangers and druids, although only as the aforementioned cleric/ranger or as a druid/fighter.

Clearly the ability of half-elves to multiclass and their aptitude as clerics was a the real advantage of playing half-elves.

Which probably explains why D&D 3E broke half-elves so badly.  With the new multiclass rules crippling the only advantage of playing a half-elf, they simply became the poor cousin to full-blooded elves.  When D&D 3.5 came out, they attempted to fix half-elves by giving them a +2 to Diplomacy and Gather Information.  This was simply not enough.

Which brings us to D&D 4E.  Admittedly, I think the half-elves in D&D 4E are a big improvement over 3E.  Their Dilettante ability is not only immensely useful, but it harkens back to their old multiclass abilities. Still, there was something that bugged me about them that I couldn’t put my finger on for a long time. 

When I finally did, it was obvious.  In fact, it was right there in the first paragraph:

Play a Half-Elf if you want...
  to be an outgoing, enthusiastic leader.
  to be a charismatic hero equally at home in two different cultures.
  to be a member of a race that favors the warlord, paladin, and warlock classes.

What bugged me is that half-elves do not make good clerics or rangers!  The cleric/ranger multiclass was extremely popular in AD&D, as were all the other cleric multiclass combinations.

The nice thing is that this is easily fixable.  As they stand in the Player’s Handbook, half-elves get a +2 Charisma, +2 Constitution.  The choice of +2 Constitution seems a little odd to me. as I have never seen half-elves as especially hardy.  In fact, the only reason I can think of to give them +2 Constitution is because all of the Player’s Handbook 1 races, except humans, have one good physical and one good mental ability.

On the other hand, many half-elves in fiction, from Elrond to Tanis Half-Elven, have been described as wise.  Giving half-elves a +2 Charisma, +2 Wisdom suddenly makes clerics and rangers viable choices again.  Since this doubling up of bonuses to either physical or mental abilities is common in the Player’s Handbook 2 races, I am not worried that I am breaking any unwritten rule of 4E race design.

I will be the first to admit that this may be a problem that only exists in my mind.  Nevertheless, I feel it is a minor tweak that goes a long way towards making half-elves in D&D 4E feel like “old-school” half-elves.

Three wrongs make a right?

I am one of those guys who can spend hours debating the minutia of RPG systems.  One frequent debating partner of mine is my friend Todd.  He is not one to embrace new game systems lightly, and 4E is no exception.  Some of his recent issues with 4E include:

• It is too difficult to hit opponents.  In 3E it was often too easy, but 4E has swung too far the other way.  This can frustrate players, especially when they are using a one shot ability like a daily power.
• There is really no reason to use implements unless you have a magical one.  Well, maybe for Wizards, but the rest of the spell-casting classes get nothing.
• The feats Implement Expertise and Weapon Expertise, from the new Player's Handbook II, are really too good to pass up.  When you pick those feats you either choose a implement for the former type or a weapon group for the latter.  You get a +1 when using the item of your choice.  The bonus increases to +2 at level 15 and +3 at level 25.

I am not sure if I agree with him on all points, but I realized that a simple house rule that would help address all of the points.  Simply grant all characters a bonus feat at first level that must be spent on either Implement Expertise or Weapon Expertise.

Having this feat would help with the issue hitting opponents.  It also gives spell-casters other than wizards a reason to use implements from the start.  Finally, getting one of the feats for free alleviates the "must have" nature of the feat, since you will have it. 

It is true, some of the classes that use both implements and weapons will have to make a choice, but many characters in those classes tend to lean one way or the other already.  If they really want both feats, well at least it just costs them one instead of two.

Is this change really necessary?  Of course not!  Nevertheless, it alleviates some potential issues without changing game balance too much.  So if your players agree with Todd on the issues described above, why not give it a try!

New Feats (And One Power) With Familiar Names

Here is my take on updating a couple of old feats to the new edition.

Weapon Finesse (Heroic Tier Feat)

Prerequisite: Dex 13

Benefit: When making a Melee Basic Attack with a light blade, you make the attack using Dex vs AC.  Damage is still determined normally.

Improved Weapon Finesse (Paragon Tier Feat)

Prerequisite: Dex 15, Weapon Finesse

Benefit:  When making a Melee Basic Attack with a light blade, your Dex modifier is used instead of your Str modifier when determining damage.

Deft Opportunist (Rogue Utility 10)

Encounter✦Martial

Immediate Interrupt     Personal

Trigger: An adjacent enemy provokes an attack of opportunity from you.

Effect: If you choose to make an opportunity attack against this opponent, you can use an at-will attack with the weapon keyword instead of a melee basic attack.

The Promise and Problems of Rituals (Part II)

In Part I, I examined some of the issues I saw with rituals in 4th Edition D&D.  Since then, Jonathan at The Core Mechanic came up with some interesting alternative rules that address many of the issues I spoke about.  It is definitely worth a read.

Nevertheless, I feel the need to present my own set of house rules on rituals.  I take a somewhat different direction than Jonathan, and I am curious to find out what people think about them.

Ritual Casting (Cleric and Wizard Class Feature)

You are able to master and perform rituals of your level or lower.  Unlike the Ritual Caster feat, you are not limited in the number of rituals you can master.  See PHB Chapter 10 for more information on how to perform rituals.

Ritual Caster (Heroic Tier Feat)

Prerequisite: Trained in Arcana or Religion

Benefit: You can master and perform four rituals of your level or lower.  You gain one ritual for free when the feat is first acquired.  The remaining three must be mastered normally (see Chapter 10).  Once you have mastered four rituals, you cannot master any more.  However, you can change which rituals you know through retraining.  When you retrain a ritual, it is removed from your ritual book and replaced with the new one.  See Chapter 10 for more information on how to perform rituals.  This feat can be taken multiple times.  Each time it is taken, you are able to master and perform four additional rituals.

Performing a Ritual (Modification to PHB Chapter 10)

Performing a ritual is very draining.  The number of rituals you can perform per day depends on your level:

At 1st - 10th level, you can perform two rituals per day. 

At 11th - 20th level, you can perform four rituals per day.

At 21st - 30th level, you can perform six rituals per day.

Each time you reach a milestone (see page 259), you regain the ability to perform one ritual if you have already expended that ability. 

After you take an extended rest, your ability to perform rituals is renewed and you start fresh with regard to the number of rituals you can perform per day.

Please note that there are no limits to the ability to assist with a ritual, or to the ability to utilize ritual scrolls.

Ritual Costs (Modification to PHB Chapter 10)

When using the rules above, it is recommended that both the purchase price and the component costs of rituals be cut in half.

The Promise and Problems of Rituals (Part I)

A friend of mine often bemoans the lack of options available to wizards in 4th Edition Dungeons & Dragons.  He feels with the focus on combat spellcasting eliminated most of the non-combat "game changing" effects old-school Wizards were able to perform. I can definitely see his point. However, from my experience many people looking at Wizards in 4th Edition tend to overlook the importance of rituals.

Rituals are where you can still find the types of spells that were common in previous editions of the game.  Rituals are not combat focused.  They often have long lasting effects.  Certain categories of old school spells, like divinations, have moved entirely over to this category.

Because of this, I have found that judicious use of rituals can inject a bit of the feel of the old editions of D&D into 4th Edition.  When I first converted my Divine Oracle Issac Winter from 3rd Edition to 4th Edition, I worried quite a bit that the character would be unrecognizable.  While the old Issac was effective in combat, he really shined outside of it.  Issac was infamous for using divinations to prepare the party and confound his enemies.  While I won't deny that he is a bit more limited in this regard, a heavy focus on divination, exploration, restoration, and scrying rituals really help make him feel like the Issac of old.

That being said, I have several issues with rituals as they are written.  In many ways I feel they are almost an afterthought, existing merely to bridge the 3rd Edition and 4th edition.  Sadly, the embody some of the worst issues of that edition as well.

One problem with rituals is that the primary limitation on how many rituals you can posses or perform is financial.  Either you have the money to purchase new rituals and components or you don't.  While I like the feel of components being an important part of the game again, how much gold flows through a campaign can vary wildly depending on the DM and the nature of the game. 

Oddly, this is a design problem that the game designers at Wizards of the Coast already saw and addressed in another aspect of the game:  When the 3rd Edition Magic Item Compendium was discussed on the D&D Podcast, the concept that magic items were limited only by price was seen as an issue.  Since game designers can be a bit conservative at times, they tended to set prices high, often to the point where no sane character would ever buy them.  I already see this problem cropping up in some rituals.

Another issue is the Ritual Caster Feat.  I actually like the fact that the feat is open to any character trained in Arcana or Religion.  Characters like the Grey Mouser or Giles from Buffy the Vampire Slayer were portrayed as able to cast elaborate spells with time and copious amounts of study, but never as true wizards or witches. 

So why do I see it as an issue?  Well, mostly because rituals have what I call "the polymorph issue".  The spell Polymorph was infamous in 3rd Edition because a single spell allowed you to transform into almost any creature in the Monster Manual, limited by hit dice.  It was a case of one spell providing to many options to the player.  To make things worse, since almost every book produced had more monsters in it, the spell became better with every book.

The Ritual Caster feat has a similar issue.  For the cost of one feat, the whole world of rituals opens up to the character.  Also, like Polymorph, the number of options available to a Ritual Caster increases with almost every book Wizards of the Coast puts out.

Still, I think that eliminating rituals from the game would be a case of throwing the baby out with the bath water.  Rituals really add a lot of flavor to D&D 4th Edition.  They also fill an important niche in the 4th Edition ecosystem, namely that they are the only mechanism for casting magic outside of the rigid structure of powers. 

Rituals just need a little attention, and perhaps a little more "crunch" to make them a truly useful and viable part of 4th Edition.  That is where Part II will come in.  I am currently putting together a number of house rules for rituals which I feel will solve at least some of these issues without eliminating the flavor that makes them so appealing in the first place.

The path to a better alignment system? (Part I)

I have never been a big fan of the alignment system in D&D.  In the old days there were nine alignments: Lawful Good, Neutral Good, Chaotic Good, Lawful Neutral, (True) Neutral, Chaotic Neutral, Lawful Evil, Neutral Evil, and Chaotic Evil. 

Unfortunately, often the names of the alignments were all the gamers in my group could agree on.  What those alignments actually meant seemed to be different to each player.  One player might argue it was ok for his Lawful Good Samurai to cut off the hand of the party thief because that was lawful in his society while other players considered it evil.  Another might argue that his lawful neutral monk had to follow up on every thing he vowed to do while other players felt his behavior was chaotic because he could choose to vow to do anything.  Who is right and who is wrong in these cases?  It's hard to say.

Oddly, the Lawful Good alignment was one of the most problematic.  Many Paladins and other players with this alignment felt forced to become "party police", much to the resentment of the other players.  Those that didn't want that role were forced to become "Lawful Stupid" and feign ignorance to what was going on around them.

I suppose I should point out that I actually like the concept of alignment in some cases, mostly in the case of extraplanar beings who are often little more then the living embodiment of an ideal anyway.  It just seems like it would be very difficult for natural beings to act within the rigid strictures of alignment.

When 4th Edition came out, they revamped the alignment system.  Now there are only five alignments:  Lawful Good, Good, Unaligned, Evil, and Chaotic Evil.  They way they are described, they probably could be more accurately called "Really Good", Good, "Screw Alignments", Evil, and "Really Evil".

I don't consider this much of an improvement.  It still has a most of the issues of the old system, with the only advantage being that there is an "opt out" button in the middle.  Still, I like the concept that aligning yourself with a faction is a choice that not everyone makes.  So it's a step in the right direction.  The real question is: How can it be improved?

Luckily for me, I have no problem stealing drawing inspiration from other systems.  So lets take a look at a few.  Warhammer Fantasy has a Law versus Chaos setup similar to Dungeons and Dragons, which is not surprising since both were inspired my Michael Moorcock's fantasy novels.  I do feel that Warhammer does a better job of integrating the war of Law versus Chaos into its campaign setting, as well as highlighting the issues with the extremes of both sides.  Perhaps some aspects of this can be put into the new system.

Another option is presented in Wizard's Oriental Adventures for the 3rd Edition game.  They remove alignment entirely.  Instead they use the concept of Honor and Taint.  The Honor system basically keeps track of how well you stick to societies codes of conduct, while Taint measures how much the "evil" of the Shadowlands has infected your soul. 

I actually like the concept of Taint a lot.  It gives nice mechanics to a the concept that the natural and unnatural may not be meant to cross.  I will admit, it has a more horror feeling to it than your average D&D game contains.  As for Honor, it works well in Oriental Adventures and probably would work well in a campaign with a more "knightly" feel than your average D&D game.  Still, there are some interesting concepts that could be incorporated into a new system.

White Wolf's new World of Darkness system provides some interesting mechanics as well.  Rather than an overarching alignment system, each character chooses a Virtue and a Vice.  Whenever the character indulges in a Virtue or a Vice, they gain a Willpower point. 

I like this a lot.  By providing an incentive to indulge in both, I believe it encourages role-playing.  Many heroes in literature are as well know for their flaws as their virtues.  Conan was strong, brave, and had a strong sense of barbarian honor.  Still, Conan was just as well know for overindulging in drinking or whoring.

Mixing and matching some concepts from these systems, and an interesting new model begins to emerge.  Taking a cue from 4th Edition D&D, lets assume that most characters are unaligned.  The unaligned would simply use a virtue and vice system similar to the one found in World of Darkness. 

On the other hand, a character could choose to align themselves with extraplanar forces.  This would provide additional benefits and additional penalties.  It also would require an opt in to a stricter morality than those simply playing an unaligned character.  It may take on some some aspects of "Taint", namely that your actions could move you up and down a scale and may have some physical effect on your character. 

So where are the details?  Well, in all honesty I don't have them.  That's the reason I placed a "Part I" at the top of the article.  I am going to be working on this alternative alignment system over the next couple of weeks.  This post is the "fluff", while future ones will present the "crunch". 

Also, while I believe this goes without saying, I will say it anyway.  Since this is a work in progress, I would love to hear peoples comments and suggestions.