Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AFGNCAAP" data-source="post: 3203023" data-attributes="member: 871">I think it's good, but honestly, I think that the d20 Allegiances system is much better.&nbsp; At the very least, it allows for characters to be loyal to organizations &amp; their ideals rather than having to somehow fot that into the 9-tier AL system.And, in addition to that, the order in which allegiances are listed indicates importance (so rather than trying to determine if a paladin is more Lawful than Good or more Good than Lawful, it can be determined quickly by looking at the order allegiances are listed in [Law, Good for the former, and Good, Law for the latter]).And, simple enough, a true Neutral character just wouldn't have any allegiances (or rather, any moral/ethical [i.e. Alignment]-based allegiances) listed on their character sheet.Nope, not at all.&nbsp; Main reason why--good/evil/law/chaos are absolutes that exist, esp. with the presence of divine beings/outsiders who embody these elements.&nbsp; Eberron is an exception to the rule, but then again, Eberron could work just fine using the Allegiances system instead of AL, IMHO.As it is, I really think that none of the base classes should have alignment requirements: I think that alignment requirements for a class be restricted to Prestige Classes (and, as such, have some classes solely as Prestige classes, like paladins, druids, berserking/raging barbarians, magical bards, magical rangers, etc.).Then again, I think the core classes should be more generic &amp; malleable, and Prestige Classes should have more focused flavors (such as thief, asssassin, knight, ninja, samurai, combat-OK cleric, druid, swashbuckler, paladin, raging barbarian, specialist mage, etc.).&nbsp; But that's just me.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AFGNCAAP, post: 3203023, member: 871"] I think it's good, but honestly, I think that the d20 Allegiances system is much better. At the very least, it allows for characters to be loyal to organizations & their ideals rather than having to somehow fot that into the 9-tier AL system. And, in addition to that, the order in which allegiances are listed indicates importance (so rather than trying to determine if a paladin is more Lawful than Good or more Good than Lawful, it can be determined quickly by looking at the order allegiances are listed in [Law, Good for the former, and Good, Law for the latter]). And, simple enough, a true Neutral character just wouldn't have any allegiances (or rather, any moral/ethical [i.e. Alignment]-based allegiances) listed on their character sheet. Nope, not at all. Main reason why--good/evil/law/chaos are absolutes that exist, esp. with the presence of divine beings/outsiders who embody these elements. Eberron is an exception to the rule, but then again, Eberron could work just fine using the Allegiances system instead of AL, IMHO. As it is, I really think that [I][B]none[/B][/I][B][/B] of the base classes should have alignment requirements: I think that alignment requirements for a class be restricted to Prestige Classes (and, as such, have some classes solely as Prestige classes, like paladins, druids, berserking/raging barbarians, magical bards, magical rangers, etc.). Then again, I think the core classes should be more generic & malleable, and Prestige Classes should have more focused flavors (such as thief, asssassin, knight, ninja, samurai, combat-OK cleric, druid, swashbuckler, paladin, raging barbarian, specialist mage, etc.). But that's just me. [/QUOTE]

Verification