Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Hussar" data-source="post: 5852324" data-attributes="member: 22779">KM - I suspect you are right.&nbsp; Those who want alignment are likely going to get what they want.&nbsp; And, as was mentioned, it's pretty easy to ignore.&nbsp; My real problem with alignment was how much of an issue it was with players.&nbsp; Players would chose alignments based on whether or not they thought the DM could screw them.For example, I had a player some time ago who put Chaotic Neutral on his character sheet.&nbsp; At the time, I didn't really say anything and, quite possibly didn't even notice.&nbsp; I'm not a big stickler for alignment obviously.&nbsp; But, as time went on I finally turned to the player and had the following conversation:Me:&nbsp; Umm, it says CN on your character sheet.Player:&nbsp; Yes.&nbsp; I want to be able to do whatever I want.Me:&nbsp; Ok, fair enough.&nbsp; But, your character is totally dependable, never acts impulsively, meticulously plans every action and is a total team player.&nbsp; How exactly is this CN?Player:&nbsp; I want to be able to do whatever I want!Me:&nbsp; Yes, I get that.&nbsp; But alignment should actually describe your character's behavior.Player:&nbsp; I want to be able to do whatever I want!Me:&nbsp; I don't think you're listening to me.&nbsp; I get that you want the freedom.&nbsp; But, apparently, what you want is to play a character that is Lawful Good or possibly Lawful Neutral, at least based on your actions in game.Player:&nbsp; I want to be able to do whatever I want!Me:&nbsp; Ummm... Lemon curry?Player:&nbsp; I want to be able to do whatever I want!Since alignment doesn't actually accurately describe the behavior of the individual or the group - Orwellian societies might be lawful, but, they hardly satsify the definition of good, and don't even get me started on demons being all about temptation and subtlety - what &quot;good arguments&quot; are there for alignment?I'm willing to be convinced here.&nbsp; But, after three plus DECADES of this discussion, I'm thinking that trying to define morality in a game is possibly beyond the scope of what game designers can actually accomplish.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Hussar, post: 5852324, member: 22779"] KM - I suspect you are right. Those who want alignment are likely going to get what they want. And, as was mentioned, it's pretty easy to ignore. My real problem with alignment was how much of an issue it was with players. Players would chose alignments based on whether or not they thought the DM could screw them. For example, I had a player some time ago who put Chaotic Neutral on his character sheet. At the time, I didn't really say anything and, quite possibly didn't even notice. I'm not a big stickler for alignment obviously. But, as time went on I finally turned to the player and had the following conversation: Me: Umm, it says CN on your character sheet. Player: Yes. I want to be able to do whatever I want. Me: Ok, fair enough. But, your character is totally dependable, never acts impulsively, meticulously plans every action and is a total team player. How exactly is this CN? Player: I want to be able to do whatever I want! Me: Yes, I get that. But alignment should actually describe your character's behavior. Player: I want to be able to do whatever I want! Me: I don't think you're listening to me. I get that you want the freedom. But, apparently, what you want is to play a character that is Lawful Good or possibly Lawful Neutral, at least based on your actions in game. Player: I want to be able to do whatever I want! Me: Ummm... Lemon curry? Player: I want to be able to do whatever I want! Since alignment doesn't actually accurately describe the behavior of the individual or the group - Orwellian societies might be lawful, but, they hardly satsify the definition of good, and don't even get me started on demons being all about temptation and subtlety - what "good arguments" are there for alignment? I'm willing to be convinced here. But, after three plus DECADES of this discussion, I'm thinking that trying to define morality in a game is possibly beyond the scope of what game designers can actually accomplish. [/QUOTE]

Verification