Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Enrico Poli1" data-source="post: 7866455" data-attributes="member: 6947027">Other objections.I.Objectivity. The Alignment system is objective, in fact a subjective one would be equal to a lack of Alignment in the game. II.Mythicality. The game implies that it's a cosmic force. Your idea that cosmic Alignment takes away free Will is simply wrong (for mortals: they are free to align with cosmic forces, and in fact go to Heaven or to Hell, as an example).III.Exclusivity. Free creatures are never exclusive in their choices. Animals are exclusive because they're not free. Angels and Demons are generally intended as exclusive, as Champions of cosmic forces.IV.Dynamism. Free creatures can change their behaviour. Non-free creatures cannot.V.Reliability. There are various grades of Good and Evil. You can, on a case-by-case, state if a creature's behaviour is mildly Good or extremely Good, for example.VI.Categoricity. This is redundant because where the individual tracts are the only thing that matters, any generalization (like your theory, or any Alignment theory) is impossible. We must admit that behaviour depends at least in part by a general aspect. This aspect is not a "group" in the social sense, but in the ontological sense (its nature). You are making a logic error, a quaternio terminorum.In the end, if a creature is free, he can act differently from his nature.VII.Consequentiality. Again, a world without these consequences is unheard of, and it would mean the lack of an Alignment system altogether. VIII. Dimensionality. Again, has anyone see a world with one-dimensional alignments? This is a purely theoretical exercise.IX.Transparency. The players read the Alignment description in the PHB, and everyone understands the basic distinction between Good and Evil, so there is a certain measure of transparency. Is it total transparency? No, it's not because it's not possible for mortal intellects.X.Facades. As you himself stated, "the objective Alignment system is known and generally understood", so the entire point is... pointless.Moreover, the fact that the descriptors are ten is arbitrary (like Kant's categories, and in fact your approach is kantian...)Overall, your classification seems to me a way to measure the grades of Alignment using some arbitrary scales. But... why? Is it a tool to give DMs and players a better understanding of the Alignment system?</blockquote>

Verification