Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="green slime" data-source="post: 3609492" data-attributes="member: 1325">So! In order to be good, I only need to declare actions that are in accord with an attempt to save the girl, no matter how feeble the attempt, nor whether or not I choose a circuitious route over a direct route? Even though, my intent is not to save the girl?*rubs hands together* Excellent! Mwahahahaha!Trying to remove intent from the equation is futile imo. I firmly believe that it is up to the DM to explain to his players, prior to the game, what is acceptable, and what is not, and also to give a player fair warning prior to undertaking actions, that conflict with their stated alignment. By fair warning, I mean taking time out to explain why, not just "Do you really want to do that?" Of course it is still ultimately up to the player to decide his actions, but at least then there will be little doubt as to the in-game consequences. Yes, this may mean a debate ensues in the middle of the game, and that is always disrupting to the flow of the moment. In the long run, however, I believe that it makes for a much smoother game, as it creates a greater understanding of the "universe" as run by the DM. IMX, the more controversial actions are generally debated in the group as a whole anyway, prior to putting the plan into action. This means it is not so difficult to gauge intent, as it may first seem.</blockquote>