Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Gizzard" data-source="post: 468153" data-attributes="member: 527">The nice thing about the alignment system is that it "works" right out of the box.  (By "works" I mean that no system of philosophy is going to be airtight; flesh out your system of allegiances and you'll see the same sort of problems -- note the discussion above about "truth").  So the alignment system is something that the DM can explain to the players in about 30 seconds and they'll understand it in general.Personally, I like the allegiance system; I try to keep my players characters to following the "dogma" of their gods rather than judging their alignment.  But the only reason why this works is because someone has gone the extra mile to spell out these dogmas.  If you say "You are a Paladin who has allegiance to the god Tyr", this means absolutely nothing without a description of Tyr.   If you say "You are a Paladin who has an allegiance to the LG god Tyr" you're right back where you started with the alignment system in the first place.  Its only when you start fleshing out the world by writing a paragraph about how Tyr feels about specific things that you've advanced beyond the alignment system.  My point is - the allegiance system is good, but its only as good as the extra work you put into it.</blockquote>