Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Merlion" data-source="post: 3747955" data-attributes="member: 10397">Having Good and Evil and no Law and Chaos doesnt mean every game is going to be a &quot;black and white good versus evil campaign.&quot;&nbsp; At least, not anymore so than it will be anyway, since even with &quot;Law&quot; and &quot;Chaos&quot; it all still boils down to Good and Evil, or at least to Right and Wrong, and the space in between. &nbsp; And thats the trouble with all aspects of D&amp;D alignment. Nothing is given to the space in between, to ambiguity or indecision. Even &quot;Neutrality&quot; is an extreme in itself. &nbsp; I dont think its about motivation. Its about intention. D&amp;D alignment only takes actions into account. Your only &quot;Good&quot; in D&amp;D if your a crusader, same with Evil. Most of the &quot;neutrals&quot; in D&amp;D are in reality Good...people who have respect and decency toward other people, but dont necessarily spend most of their time evanglizing or fighting evil.&nbsp;&nbsp; And because of how the detect spells work, theres no room for ambiguity. Everyone detects as good, evil or neutral. I think there should be room for conflicted characters, who are teetering between good and evil. I dont mean neutrality, sitting on the fence, I mean being poised between the two.&nbsp; And, you do realize its possible to have enemies that are morally Good right? People can do bad, ill advised, harmful things for good reasons and good intentions.&nbsp; I dislike the &quot;Law&quot; &quot;Chaos&quot; bit of alignment in D&amp;D...and really, how it deals with alignment in general. But I equally dislike, for instance, Monte Cook's decision to remove all alignment and concepts of Good and Evil from Arcana Evolved/Unearthed (especially since, as is often the case, it was simply replaced with other things that were clearly substitutes for Good and Evil.)&nbsp;&nbsp; Yep. Because &quot;Law&quot; and &quot;Chaos&quot; arent really alignment concepts. At best, D&amp;D Law and Chaos are basically personality traits, or political views, better left to roleplaying.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Merlion, post: 3747955, member: 10397"] Having Good and Evil and no Law and Chaos doesnt mean every game is going to be a "black and white good versus evil campaign." At least, not anymore so than it will be anyway, since even with "Law" and "Chaos" it all still boils down to Good and Evil, or at least to Right and Wrong, and the space in between. And thats the trouble with all aspects of D&D alignment. Nothing is given to the space in between, to ambiguity or indecision. Even "Neutrality" is an extreme in itself. I dont think its about motivation. Its about intention. D&D alignment only takes actions into account. Your only "Good" in D&D if your a crusader, same with Evil. Most of the "neutrals" in D&D are in reality Good...people who have respect and decency toward other people, but dont necessarily spend most of their time evanglizing or fighting evil. And because of how the detect spells work, theres no room for ambiguity. Everyone detects as good, evil or neutral. I think there should be room for conflicted characters, who are teetering between good and evil. I dont mean neutrality, sitting on the fence, I mean being poised between the two. And, you do realize its possible to have enemies that are morally Good right? People can do bad, ill advised, harmful things for good reasons and good intentions. I dislike the "Law" "Chaos" bit of alignment in D&D...and really, how it deals with alignment in general. But I equally dislike, for instance, Monte Cook's decision to remove all alignment and concepts of Good and Evil from Arcana Evolved/Unearthed (especially since, as is often the case, it was simply replaced with other things that were clearly substitutes for Good and Evil.) Yep. Because "Law" and "Chaos" arent really alignment concepts. At best, D&D Law and Chaos are basically personality traits, or political views, better left to roleplaying. [/QUOTE]

Verification