Pathfinder 1E Could Pathfinder take D&D's place...

[billd91]

I've always wondered why people would want to play with a mechanic that has such horrible philosophical underpinning. Please tell me why you like playing with a system that anyone who has any clue how morality and philosophy works would laugh at?

1) Because it's a game abstraction that helps give players some moral structure to use and play a role that isn't simply them projected onto their avatar.

2) Because it can be explained with classic philosophy much better than you apparently think.

 

[gamerprinter]

I've always wondered why people would want to play with a mechanic that has such horrible philosophical underpinning. Please tell me why you like playing with a system that anyone who has any clue how morality and philosophy works would laugh at?

For my gaming group, most of our games involve morally ambiguous decisions which matches the standard most party members are some kind of neutral alignment - when this occurs (which is often) alignment matters little, just as something to hang your hat onto.

However, sometimes our group specifically plays a good or evil group. Knowing who/what you are and who/what the opposition is, especially regarding alignment is the underpinning of those games. How does one play an evil party when there is no alignment?

Also D&D cosmology is based on alignment. It would require disassembly of the universe to accomodate the removal of alignment - why do that, and why go to the work of rebuildinging a cosmology without alignment?

In most of our games alignment means nothing, but in those games where it does matter, it's at the heart of all actions. Most of the time, our philosophies are not even an issue, so why should alignment be a problem. I don't want to emulate reality - that's why we're playing a game.

 

[Pentius]

I've always wondered why people would want to play with a mechanic that has such horrible philosophical underpinning. Please tell me why you like playing with a system that anyone who has any clue how morality and philosophy works would laugh at?

I hate alignment, myself, but given that I've enjoyed playing with systems that disregard physics, genetics, genre conventions, common (or uncommon) sense, delicate sensibilities, psychology and philosophy, sometimes all at once, I don't really have much trouble seeing why it might not be a problem for some people, whether or not it aligns with their philosophical and moral beliefs.

 

[prosfilaes]

I've always wondered why people would want to play with a mechanic that has such horrible philosophical underpinning. Please tell me why you like playing with a system that anyone who has any clue how morality and philosophy works would laugh at?

Because it effectively turns most of your enemies into Nazis. It provides a simple polarizing, simplifying overlay over the whole world. It's designed to keep real world morality out, not pull it in.

 

[Androrc]

I've always wondered why people would want to play with a mechanic that has such horrible philosophical underpinning. Please tell me why you like playing with a system that anyone who has any clue how morality and philosophy works would laugh at?

Because the "solution" (not having any system for morality) is even worse.

 

[Ettin]

How do you know you're playing an evil character if you can't write "evil" on your sheet?

How do you know you're playing a wizard if you don't write "wizard" on your sheet?

How do you know you're playing D&D if it doesn't say "D&D" on your sheet?

Does a rose by any other name smell as sweet?

 

[Ettin]

Hell no it doesn't.

 

[Summer-Knight925]

Mod Note: Folks, you're allowed to have an opinion on a subject, and to say so. But, if you're going to poke people in the eye with it, don't act like it is all their fault if they react to the jab. Edition warring is built on a foundation of figuring that it is always the other guy who is to blame. ~Umbran

does this mean I'm in trouble?

 

[TheAuldGrump]

Pathfinder > 4e

now you insert angry remarks as I know you will.

I prefer Pathfinder =/= 4e.

The point of playing RPGs is to have fun - I do not have fun playing 4e, so I do not play it.

For me Pathfinder > 4e.

If Bob deGamer has fun with 4e, but does not have fun with Pathfinder then for him 4e > Pathfinder. I may shake my head at his choice, but if he is having fun, then who cares? He has gotten the point, and is playing what he likes.

It is only if Bob gets in my space telling me that Pathfinder sucks that I have a problem. If he doesn't, then I play my game, he plays his, monsters get killed, treasure gets looted.

The Auld Grump

 

[Summer-Knight925]

I prefer Pathfinder =/= 4e.

The point of playing RPGs is to have fun - I do not have fun playing 4e, so I do not play it.

For me Pathfinder > 4e.

If Bob deGamer has fun with 4e, but does not have fun with Pathfinder then for him 4e > Pathfinder. I may shake my head at his choice, but if he is having fun, then who cares? He has gotten the point, and is playing what he likes.

It is only if Bob gets in my space telling me that Pathfinder sucks that I have a problem. If he doesn't, then I play my game, he plays his, monsters get killed, treasure gets looted.

The Auld Grump

In the end, we're all happy.
The real question is, if a violent fungus falls in the middle of a dungeon and no one is around to hear it, who get's the XP?