Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Ruin Explorer" data-source="post: 9395560" data-attributes="member: 18">The perpetual problem I have with that is that neither &quot;side&quot; makes any sense nor is beneficial to living beings, so why the heck would anyone alive side with either except bribes? They don't make sense as factions to me. Reading Moorcock actually made this increasingly more obvious as an issue.Yeah I think this is the sort of approach that can produce actually-interesting results and characters.I do think campaign-specific or setting-specific axes can be potentially interesting, but you have to avoid the Law-Chaos problem of &quot;The only reason to side with either is bribes&quot;.These being from Stellaris, I note.But notably whilst Stellaris does see these as opposing, they're not really axes because you pick two or three out of a large array, which I think works a lot better than if they forced you to pick a position on all of those. They're also a bit more civilizational rather than individual.As a general point too I think Materialist-Spiritualist is incompatible with about 95% of D&amp;D settings, because they're all materialist. D&amp;D's basic concept of the universe is purely materialist - the planes aren't places that might exist, we don't know, they're places that definitely do exist. The gods aren't in question. You could go chat to them if you were rich and powerful enough to pay spellcasters to track them down for you. There's no real room for conventional spiritualism.The only one I can think of where it even sorta-works is Eberron.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Ruin Explorer, post: 9395560, member: 18"] The perpetual problem I have with that is that neither "side" makes any sense nor is beneficial to living beings, so why the heck would anyone alive side with either except bribes? They don't make sense as factions to me. Reading Moorcock actually made this increasingly more obvious as an issue. Yeah I think this is the sort of approach that can produce actually-interesting results and characters. I do think campaign-specific or setting-specific axes can be potentially interesting, but you have to avoid the Law-Chaos problem of "The only reason to side with either is bribes". These being from Stellaris, I note. But notably whilst Stellaris does see these as opposing, they're not really axes because you pick two or three out of a large array, which I think works a lot better than if they forced you to pick a position on all of those. They're also a bit more civilizational rather than individual. As a general point too I think Materialist-Spiritualist is incompatible with about 95% of D&D settings, because they're all materialist. D&D's basic concept of the universe is purely materialist - the planes aren't places that might exist, we don't know, they're places that definitely do exist. The gods aren't in question. You could go chat to them if you were rich and powerful enough to pay spellcasters to track them down for you. There's no real room for conventional spiritualism. The only one I can think of where it even sorta-works is Eberron. [/QUOTE]

Verification