Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
The
VOIDRUNNER'S CODEX
is coming! Explore new worlds, fight oppressive empires, fend off fearsome aliens, and wield deadly psionics with this comprehensive boxed set expansion for 5E and A5E!
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Lawful Good Alignment and Roleplaying
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="TenseAlcyoneus" data-source="post: 1056449" data-attributes="member: 11422"><p>Well, I'm glad you began that as a supposition. ;-)</p><p></p><p>I don't think that alignment "defines character." I think that alignment is a fundamental part of what defines a character. By 'fundamental' I mean "serving as, or being an essential part of, a foundation or basis; basic; underlying," not "being an original or primary source" as you have taken it. (Random House Dictionary) I have made the claim that alignment is more <em>fundamental</em> than action in three ways: temporally, logically, and plot-wise. This in no way implies that alignment is a unique definition of a character. I <em>do</em> think that alignment is the primary source for a character's motivations, and the logical and probable actions of characters derive from their motivations.</p><p></p><p>Further, I do think that alignment can change. This also deals with DonAdam's remarks:</p><p></p><p> </p><p></p><p>But, "the characters' actions...determine his particular status" is exactly what we mean when we say "acting against alignment." A character's perspective is changing, he is changing sides and changing motivations, and this needs to be reflected in the game play, especially spell mechanics. My understanding of your claim, DonAdam, was that under a "status" approach there could be no acting against alignment. I pointed out that this only seems to be the case, because for the DM and the player to judge the change in status presumes some standard -- that standard is alignment.</p><p></p><p>So, WizarDru, I explain changing alignments as changing perspectives -- perspectives that have real game effects. But, we may be arriving at the point of the disagreement. If actions determine alignment, and alignment changes have no inherent penalty (there very well might be role-playing penalties/benefits) as DonAdam suggests, then how do we justify spells like Protection from Law? If alignment <em>is</em> action (“the sum total of actions”), then we are protecting ourselves from Lawful actions, right? How does a Lawful spear thrust differ from a Chaotic spear thrust? How does a Chaotic Hammer smite with "Chaotic power?" After all, Law and Chaos are just descriptions of the actions taken by a character in the past, right? He very well might go neutral in the next five minutes. ;-) (DonAdam, I know this isn't your position.)</p><p></p><p>Seriously, I don't have to give up flexibility, alignment changes, class changes, etc. just because I choose to buy into D&D's structure of cosmic conflict. In fact, if I don't buy into it, I will need to revamp the spell system.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="TenseAlcyoneus, post: 1056449, member: 11422"] Well, I'm glad you began that as a supposition. ;-) I don't think that alignment "defines character." I think that alignment is a fundamental part of what defines a character. By 'fundamental' I mean "serving as, or being an essential part of, a foundation or basis; basic; underlying," not "being an original or primary source" as you have taken it. (Random House Dictionary) I have made the claim that alignment is more [I]fundamental[/I] than action in three ways: temporally, logically, and plot-wise. This in no way implies that alignment is a unique definition of a character. I [I]do[/I] think that alignment is the primary source for a character's motivations, and the logical and probable actions of characters derive from their motivations. Further, I do think that alignment can change. This also deals with DonAdam's remarks: But, "the characters' actions...determine his particular status" is exactly what we mean when we say "acting against alignment." A character's perspective is changing, he is changing sides and changing motivations, and this needs to be reflected in the game play, especially spell mechanics. My understanding of your claim, DonAdam, was that under a "status" approach there could be no acting against alignment. I pointed out that this only seems to be the case, because for the DM and the player to judge the change in status presumes some standard -- that standard is alignment. So, WizarDru, I explain changing alignments as changing perspectives -- perspectives that have real game effects. But, we may be arriving at the point of the disagreement. If actions determine alignment, and alignment changes have no inherent penalty (there very well might be role-playing penalties/benefits) as DonAdam suggests, then how do we justify spells like Protection from Law? If alignment [I]is[/I] action (“the sum total of actions”), then we are protecting ourselves from Lawful actions, right? How does a Lawful spear thrust differ from a Chaotic spear thrust? How does a Chaotic Hammer smite with "Chaotic power?" After all, Law and Chaos are just descriptions of the actions taken by a character in the past, right? He very well might go neutral in the next five minutes. ;-) (DonAdam, I know this isn't your position.) Seriously, I don't have to give up flexibility, alignment changes, class changes, etc. just because I choose to buy into D&D's structure of cosmic conflict. In fact, if I don't buy into it, I will need to revamp the spell system. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*TTRPGs General
Lawful Good Alignment and Roleplaying
Top