Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Sword of Spirit" data-source="post: 7979104" data-attributes="member: 6677017">I still take 3e's alignment descriptions as my standard. They actually made sense and ejected a lot of stray nonsensical crap that had been scattered around in previous material--while actually according with how 1e-2e actually assigned alignments to NPCs a lot of the time. (Of the zillions of NPCs listed with &quot;Neutral&quot; or &quot;True Neutral&quot; alignment in 1e-2e products, the vast majority of them were really 3e &quot;neutral&quot;, not &quot;True Neutral&quot;, but 1e-2e didn't really have a default &quot;regular person&quot; alignment, so they just wrote up &quot;Neutral&quot; in their statblock and ignored how the rules actually defined it. 3e actually defined the &quot;neutral&quot; alignment as a normal default regular human, rather than some one with a wacky active-balance philosophy of life.)I doubt many people have ever existed who actually like alignment rules. I doubt the people who wrote them liked them, and they most likely wouldn't have made those rules in hindsight.It's really about exactly what you said. Those (like me) who like alignment, like the concepts of it and how it works in the multiverse and such. So getting supernaturally injured from touching a powerful object of opposed alignment, or having different cool effects when traveling the planes--those are interesting and add to the game. But nobody wants to mess with XP penalties or &quot;your character wouldn't do that&quot; crap.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Sword of Spirit, post: 7979104, member: 6677017"] I still take 3e's alignment descriptions as my standard. They actually made sense and ejected a lot of stray nonsensical crap that had been scattered around in previous material--while actually according with how 1e-2e actually assigned alignments to NPCs a lot of the time. (Of the zillions of NPCs listed with "Neutral" or "True Neutral" alignment in 1e-2e products, the vast majority of them were really 3e "neutral", not "True Neutral", but 1e-2e didn't really have a default "regular person" alignment, so they just wrote up "Neutral" in their statblock and ignored how the rules actually defined it. 3e actually defined the "neutral" alignment as a normal default regular human, rather than some one with a wacky active-balance philosophy of life.) I doubt many people have ever existed who actually like alignment [I]rules[/I]. I doubt the people who wrote them liked them, and they most likely wouldn't have made those rules in hindsight. It's really about exactly what you said. Those (like me) who like alignment, like the concepts of it and how it works in the multiverse and such. So getting supernaturally injured from touching a powerful object of opposed alignment, or having different cool effects when traveling the planes--those are interesting and add to the game. But nobody wants to mess with XP penalties or "your character wouldn't do that" crap. [/QUOTE]

Verification