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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 468383" data-attributes="member: 4937">"It is utterly impossible to use alignment in modern games (D20 Modern?). Is George W. Bush lawful good? Some Americans say yes. Is GWB lawful neutral/evil? Some Europeans say yes. Is GWB chaotic evil? Some Middle Eastern Islamists say yes. Here, alignment just has to go out the door. Traits, beliefs, and nationalities are what is gold here."Here I think we are getting to the heart of the problem.  The problem isn't whether 'George W. Bush' is lawful good or chaotic evil.  The problem is whether or not you can tell whether he is.  Somewhere around here is a post where I said that just because someone has an alignment doesn't mean it should be clear what it is.  The problem isn't with the 'alignment system' (although sure it has problems), the problem is with shallow fantasy games where the DM labels everything so you will know what it is, sort of like a shallow flight simulator where everything 'friendly' is clearly labeled so and is immune to your 'friendly fire'.  People are complex things, and even the most sincere in thier beliefs will have a hard time convincing people (much less everyone) that they are who they claim to be.   This isn't a problem with the alignment system.   I suspect that even if I can't say what it is, George Bush really does have a set of beliefs and principals which he is doing his level best to uphold.  I'm willing to bet that if I _knew_ what they where I could catogorize them as good or evil or somewhere in between, or law or chaotic or somewhere in between.  Even Clinton had some beliefs and principals (and here I'm on firmer ground because my family knows his family), albiet not necessarily 'good' ones, but certainly ones which can be described.  Nonetheless, to this day some people aren't clear on what Clinton stood for, and why should they be given the conflicting witnesses.   Why should fantasy worlds be any different?  Why should you know from afar what the morals of anyone are?  Why should everyones reputation match thier true beliefs?Traits?  Sure, these are handy for describing someone.  I don't care what alignment system you use, a well constructed character is going to have alot of definable traits - even though what these might be might not be entirely clear to an observer at the beginning.  I can be greedy.  I can be ambitious.  I can be chaste.  Is this enough in itself to predict my behavior?  Maybe on some issues, but any two people sharing these traits can have these traits for different reasons and break from them into other behaviors unexpectedly based on what those deeper reasons are.   At some level, whatever you call it, that is 'alignment'.Nationalities?  At some level, ones culture shapes who we are, but to be frank, using this to define someone is bordering on racism and is shallower even than alignment.Beliefs?  And what is 'alignment' if not core beliefs?Look, it doesn't matter how you define the true beliefs of a character.  However you define them, they may not be, should not be in some cases, staplable on thier forehead.  Let's suppose we try to define GWB in terms of D20 modern.  Ok, where do his real loyalties really lie?  To himself?  To his family?  To his political party?  To his State?  To his nation?   To a set of idealistic principals?  To his God?  To a bunch of oil companies?  To Satan? Ask a hundred people and you'll get at least a dozen answers.  This has nothing to do with an alignment system.  It has to do with shallow thinking.  Maybe you could argue that the alignment system encourages shallow thinking, but I would counterargue that people are enclined to think shallowly with or without an alignment system and that at the least some alignment system, any alignment system, makes a gamer stop and think from time to time.</blockquote>

Verification