D&D General D&D doesn't need Evil

[Oofta]

Again, that’s baggage you’re bringing, the topic is “D&D doesn’t need evil,” not “D&D shouldn’t have evil.”

The biggest hit movies are the ones that revolve around the fight of good versus evil. I think one of the reasons D&D is as big as it is because for a lot of people it supports this idea of good versus evil.

The MCEU doesn't need to be about good versus evil, heroes versus villains. Then again, The Watchmen didn't exactly spawn a multi-billion dollar franchise. I don't think D&D would be as big without the core concept of good versus evil that can be easily ignored if you want.

 

[Oofta]

Right, and alignment could likewise be replaced with another form of “shorthand”.

This thread is not about alignment. It's about generic concepts of evil.

 

[Aldarc]

THAC0 was just math that was replaced by a system that did the same thing. The core concept never went away.

Depends on who you ask. You clearly aren't bothered by its replacement with another ingredient. The secret sauce has been mutable for five editions. It's possible that D&D succeeded despite of the secret sauce, which clearly changes all the time, and not because of it.

Besides, I have yet to hear a cogent argument of why evil is bad for the game other than "it's controversial". It's only controversial because people say they don't want to use it in their games with no argument about what the negatives are.

Discussing the negatives have been done before, including in threads in which you have participated. Debates surrounding discussing the negatives have a proven track record of getting threads closed. @Charlaquin has said as much in this thread.

The biggest hit movies are the ones that revolve around the fight of good versus evil. I think one of the reasons D&D is as big as it is because for a lot of people it supports this idea of good versus evil.

The MCEU doesn't need to be about good versus evil, heroes versus villains. Then again, The Watchmen didn't exactly spawn a multi-billion dollar franchise. I don't think D&D would be as big without the core concept of good versus evil that can be easily ignored if you want.

So after Charlaquin distinguishes between "D&D doesn’t need evil” and “D&D shouldn’t have evil,” why do you keep arguing against the latter as if it was the former?

 

[Oofta]

Depends on who you ask. You clearly aren't bothered by its replacement with another ingredient. The secret sauce has been mutable for five editions. It's possible that D&D succeeded despite of the secret sauce, which clearly changes all the time, and not because of it.


Discussing the negatives have been done before, including in threads in which you have participated. Debates surrounding discussing the negatives have a proven track record of getting threads closed. @Charlaquin has said as much in this thread.


So after Charlaquin distinguishes between "D&D doesn’t need evil” and “D&D shouldn’t have evil,” why do you keep arguing against the latter as if it was the former?

I'm not discussing alignment. Good vs Evil sells and is core to most the successful action-oriented entertainment. It's as simple as that.

 

[Charlaquin]

The biggest hit movies are the ones that revolve around the fight of good versus evil. I think one of the reasons D&D is as big as it is because for a lot of people it supports this idea of good versus evil.

Sure, but good and evil don’t need to be enshrined in the rules for people who want that to have it.

The MCEU doesn't need to be about good versus evil, heroes versus villains. Then again, The Watchmen didn't exactly spawn a multi-billion dollar franchise. I don't think D&D would be as big without the core concept of good versus evil that can be easily ignored if you want.

The MCU hardly ever even mentions evil. It has villains with concrete motivations. Evaluation of them as evil is something you as an audience bring with you, not a label the story hangs on them.

 

[Charlaquin]

This thread is not about alignment. It's about generic concepts of evil.

Which is one of the major problems with alignment.

 

[Aldarc]

I'm not discussing alignment. Good vs Evil sells and is core to most the successful action-oriented entertainment. It's as simple as that.

looks at OP's topic and reads through entire thread

So I got some news for you, Oofta. After double-checking, it turns out that this thread is not about what sells or whether good vs. evil sells.

 

[Oofta]

looks at OP's topic and reads through entire thread

So I got some news for you, Oofta. After double-checking, it turns out that this thread is not about what sells or whether good vs. evil sells.

It's a game. Selling more copies of the game is good for the hobby. You don't need to use all aspects of the game if you don't want to.

 

[Oofta]

Which is one of the major problems with alignment.

Only if you want to have a philosophy course. I don't remember anyone I've ever actually played the games with (probably in the hundreds) ever having a major problem with the broad concepts of good and evil as applied in the game.

 

[Charlaquin]

Only if you want to have a philosophy course. I don't remember anyone I've ever actually played the games with (probably in the hundreds) ever having a major problem with the broad concepts of good and evil as applied in the game.

You play with different people than I do.