Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 4688577" data-attributes="member: 32740">You're just making my point for me.  Likely?  Of course it's likely.  The point is that without detailed information like, say, whether those villagers are themselves evil, just the act of killing a lot of villagers is NOT in and of itself evil.  The motivations of the character in killing the villagers is necessary to determine whether the simple act of killing villagers is evil. Here, or indeed any website anywhere, one thread after another discussing alignment along the lines of, "Is this evil?  Is my character chaotic?  Should the characters alignment change?" draws immediate, conflicting conclusions from responders. What I want is for people to examine the PURPOSE of alignment.  My basic assertion is that alignment is a roleplaying guideline and if it assists players in choosing actions for their characters that are consistent and reasonable - or which the player then UNDERSTANDS to be INconsistent and UNreasonable - then it's doing its job.  But it is inherently subjective judgement in deciding if a characters alignment CHANGES because of certain actions.  DM's must therefore start ANY campaign that uses alignment with a discussion of how HE interprets alignment to work in certain detailed instances, when he would change a characters alignment, the consequences of doing so, etc.  And when it comes up in a game the DM should again make sure the player understands the DM's position and the consequences before the consequences are actually APPLIED.  That then fulfulls what should be the purpose of alignment.  It isn't going to be fulfilled by endless conflicting opinions here on, "Is this evil?  Is that Evil?  Should the characters alignment change?" In fact it's required for that very reason.  Players don't maintain a running monologue describing their characters thoughts and motivations.  What affects their characters alignment is what their character DOES.  When a player has a character do something the DM sees as inconsistent/inappropriate for their alignment then the DM needs to FIND OUT what the player is thinking because judging on the action without taking the time to learn the players point of view and applying only the DM's own is what leads to arguments about alignment.  And again, if the purpose of alignment is to guide players choices of action for their characters it's not doing its job if the way it gets played IN-GAME is as a guessing-game of what he DM will/won't object to. I'm too old and too much of a grognard for tact to be my first concern.  Sometimes though it requires pushing buttons to get people to think of things in different ways.  Rudely phrased statements of, "you're all wrong" may be condescending, but if it directs conversation to the core of the problem I don't cry much anymore when I make such blunders.  I just TRY not to do it too often/unnecessarily.<img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/erm.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":erm:" title="Erm    :erm:" data-shortname=":erm:" /> Sometimes simple questions and answers hide deeper issues.  Have a better day. Oh, and stay off my lawn.</blockquote>

Verification