Unpopular opinions go here

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

It's generally bad to design a game specifically for new players. If the game is interesting and good, they'll figure it out.

That feels like a way to excuse both bad writing and bad design.

If an idea is worth presenting, it's worth the effort of presenting it well.

 

[Gradine]

Level and classes? Lol, D&D was videogame-y before videogames even were.

I think we're running into a Hydrox/Oreo situation here.

Right, the reasons videogames have levels and classes is because D&D had them

 

[CreamCloud0]

no i've read many many articles over the years even by Gygax and company that tried over and over to prevent the modeling of personality by alignment. Now they often confused people by then telling them what a person with a LG morality would find acceptable and what a person with a CE morality might do totally wiping out all the effort they put into explaining that personality and alignment are not related but do affect each other on the periphery. I've found the only way I've ever actually made that point is to play a LE or CG alignment and let the other players guess whether I'm good or evil. They always guess good when I play LE and they always guess Evil when I play CG. Because my CG character often refuses to accept the law and order schtick and will break people out of prison, openly flout laws, lie to get his way and none of that conradicts thier morality. My LE characters on the other hand tend to be superficially kind, thoughtful and very good at reading people and what motivates them because that makes them useful. So they stroke the ego's, make them feel good and use them to accomplish tasks that bring law and order to their benefit. I've only had one player in 30 years ever call me out playing a LE character. Everyone else thinks the Law and Order thing is a lock for good. Sadly not much different than political discourse.

the amount of disbelief i'm met with when i try to explain to people that MCU's captain america is actually Chaotic Good, that just because he has morals and works with the government and commends following the law does not make him lawful, so much of his films involve him disobeying authority and breaking rules just to do what he thinks is 'morally right' or to help a friend.

 

[Celebrim]

Thought of one that should have been on my original list:

I'd rather play more Nethack than any version of Diablo, and so should you.

 

[nevin]

the amount of disbelief i'm met with when i try to explain to people that MCU's captain america is actually Chaotic Good, that just because he has morals and works with the government and commends following the law does not make him lawful, so much of his films involve him disobeying authority and breaking rules just to do what he thinks is 'morally right' or to help a friend.

/nod I feel the pain in that statement and I have felt the pain in that exact argument when i made it. Most people's heads explode when try to explain Stark is just a Narcississitic LG character who believes in law and order as long as he gets to make the rules.

 

[Reynard]

Right, the reasons videogames have levels and classes is because D&D had them

The History of Computer Role-Playing Games Part 1: The Early Years (19

Welcome, brave adventurer, to the first of my in-depth feature articles exploring the history of our favorite computer game genre: The Computer Role-Playing Gam

www.gamedeveloper.com

 

[Celebrim]

the amount of disbelief i'm met with when i try to explain to people that MCU's captain america is actually Chaotic Good, that just because he has morals and works with the government and commends following the law does not make him lawful, so much of his films involve him disobeying authority and breaking rules just to do what he thinks is 'morally right' or to help a friend.

No, you just don't understand what makes someone lawful. It's not whether they respect (or disrespect) the authority of the government. Lawful has to do with whether you see yourself as the source of meaning and authority or whether you seem something external to yourself as the source of meaning and authority. Cap' makes it clear that his morality isn't his own and that he really thinks right and wrong are more than a matter of opinion. But it's also true that Cap' thinks that his source of morality is one that the government ought to share and that if the government departs from morality as he has received it, then it's the government not him that is in the wrong. You could argue with Cap' that he is in the wrong by appealing to his source of morality and making an argument based on it, but you couldn't get Cap' to agree that the government ought to be his source of morality. You could only get Cap' to agree that he ought to respect the government in as far as doing so didn't put him outside higher law. This is a "liege" type structure typical to Lawful morality systems where when your honor and duty is in conflict, you break the tie by holding allegiance to whatever the higher authority is.

 

[Celebrim]

...who believes in law and order as long as he gets to make the rules.

I'm sorry, but believing you get to make the rules is the very definition of being chaotic.

PS: Stark is a particularly difficult character to talk about though because he undergoes an alignment shift as part of his character development.

PPS: And here I am arguing alignment despite just declaring how boring doing so has become.

 

[Whizbang Dustyboots]

the amount of disbelief i'm met with when i try to explain to people that MCU's captain america is actually Chaotic Good, that just because he has morals and works with the government and commends following the law does not make him lawful, so much of his films involve him disobeying authority and breaking rules just to do what he thinks is 'morally right' or to help a friend.

I think he's actually Neutral Good. He clearly believes that we're better off when society follows good and just laws, but he doesn't believe that laws are inherently good and is skeptical of those who create and enforce them. The MCU Cap -- assuming we're talking about Steve, here -- is probably closer to Chaotic than the comic book one is, though.

 

[nevin]

No, you just don't understand what makes someone lawful. It's not whether they respect (or disrespect) the authority of the government. Lawful has to do with whether you see yourself as the source of meaning and authority or whether you seem something external to yourself as the source of meaning and authority. Cap' makes it clear that his morality isn't his own and that he really thinks right and wrong are more than a matter of opinion. But it's also true that Cap' thinks that his source of morality is one that the government ought to share and that if the government departs from morality as he has received it, then it's the government not him that is in the wrong. You could argue with Cap' that he is in the wrong by appealing to his source of morality and making an argument based on it, but you couldn't get Cap' to agree that the government ought to be his source of morality. You could only get Cap' to agree that he ought to respect the government in as far as doing so didn't put him outside higher law. This is a "liege" type structure typical to Lawful morality systems where when your honor and duty is in conflict, you break the tie by holding allegiance to whatever the higher authority is.

WRONGGGGGGGGGGGGGG seening yourself as the source of lawfulness just means you are a NARCISSISIST. It's the moral code that believes Law and Order to benefit Goodness is the best way to live. You being the source of it has nothing to do with it. narcissism and being the center of it has nothing to do with a moral code.