Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="attevil" data-source="post: 6579249" data-attributes="member: 6789426">I agree, even with Christian values as a norm, which the alignment system seems to be trying to reflect, there is a lot open to interpretation. To me this is an indication that a game system is bad. I think D&amp;D should have actually written up a list of things that are good, evil, chaotic, neutral and lawful, but that is a daunting task, which is another indication its a bad game mechanic.Cyber Run uses NPC opinion and reputation to give consequences to &quot;bad&quot; actions, if someone uses the steal, cheat or intimidate action, then they have a chance of the NPC opinion of their character lowering as well as their reputation lowering because the NPC makes a post on social media of what the character did. If the character used one of these actions for a &quot;greater good&quot; then the GM can decide not to change the NPC opinion or the character reputation level. This has a potential of players arguing with the GM, but instead of saying there is an Objective Good and Evil like the alignment system, this is based on the subjective view of a single NPC. Shields being a different mechanic makes a lot of sense!I think you described it better than me, you are right it is more about being rule restrictive that determines if an inexperienced GM can pull off a decent game.As always, thanks for your comments!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="attevil, post: 6579249, member: 6789426"] I agree, even with Christian values as a norm, which the alignment system seems to be trying to reflect, there is a lot open to interpretation. To me this is an indication that a game system is bad. I think D&D should have actually written up a list of things that are good, evil, chaotic, neutral and lawful, but that is a daunting task, which is another indication its a bad game mechanic. Cyber Run uses NPC opinion and reputation to give consequences to "bad" actions, if someone uses the steal, cheat or intimidate action, then they have a chance of the NPC opinion of their character lowering as well as their reputation lowering because the NPC makes a post on social media of what the character did. If the character used one of these actions for a "greater good" then the GM can decide not to change the NPC opinion or the character reputation level. This has a potential of players arguing with the GM, but instead of saying there is an Objective Good and Evil like the alignment system, this is based on the subjective view of a single NPC. Shields being a different mechanic makes a lot of sense! I think you described it better than me, you are right it is more about being rule restrictive that determines if an inexperienced GM can pull off a decent game. As always, thanks for your comments! [/QUOTE]

Verification