Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Tervin" data-source="post: 4231148" data-attributes="member: 66491">Sometimes it feels like some people really work hard at not understanding what I mean. Or perhaps I was that unclear? In that case, I am sorry.Having both a Good vs Evil conflict and a Law vs Chaos conflict independent of each other is diverse compared to only having a Good vs Evil conflict. Alignments are primitive and sometimes stupid tools, but that does not mean that they should be used as primitively as possible.Hmm both the earlier games and this one are called &quot;Dungeons &amp; Dragons&quot; This one claims to be the new edition of it. In the old system the Law vs Chaos (independent of Good vs Evil) existed. Now it does not. The Good vs Evil existed before, and does now. Yes it is a redesign. And it is a redesign that takes something away. Of course not. It was bad. This is worse. Ok? As for why it is worse, see above.Yes, agreed. But the new system is more dumbed down. (See above.) And, once more, the interesting part is not just modeling individual characters, it is modeling trends in races, cultures, organizations as well as characters and monsters. Alignment is useful for story- and worldbuilding more than it is for character building.&nbsp;Well I could go through the whole concept of thinking bigger than just individuals again, but that seems unnecessary. Instead I will agree once more. It would be stupid to say it is impossible to do those things. It would be true to say it is harder to convey certain concepts when the shorthand for it is no longer there. No alignment system makes anything impossible. The new one suggests that certain concepts will not get the support they used to have, as WotC will create their products using their new dumbed down shorthand. And that is actually what I care about. Not what people get to write under Alignment on a character sheet, and what they mean by it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Tervin, post: 4231148, member: 66491"] Sometimes it feels like some people really work hard at not understanding what I mean. Or perhaps I was that unclear? In that case, I am sorry. Having both a Good vs Evil conflict and a Law vs Chaos conflict independent of each other is diverse compared to only having a Good vs Evil conflict. Alignments are primitive and sometimes stupid tools, but that does not mean that they should be used as primitively as possible. Hmm both the earlier games and this one are called "Dungeons & Dragons" This one claims to be the new edition of it. In the old system the Law vs Chaos (independent of Good vs Evil) existed. Now it does not. The Good vs Evil existed before, and does now. Yes it is a redesign. And it is a redesign that takes something away. Of course not. It was bad. This is worse. Ok? As for why it is worse, see above. Yes, agreed. But the new system is more dumbed down. (See above.) And, once more, the interesting part is not just modeling individual characters, it is modeling trends in races, cultures, organizations as well as characters and monsters. Alignment is useful for story- and worldbuilding more than it is for character building. Well I could go through the whole concept of thinking bigger than just individuals again, but that seems unnecessary. Instead I will agree once more. It would be stupid to say it is impossible to do those things. It would be true to say it is harder to convey certain concepts when the shorthand for it is no longer there. No alignment system makes anything impossible. The new one suggests that certain concepts will not get the support they used to have, as WotC will create their products using their new dumbed down shorthand. And that is actually what I care about. Not what people get to write under Alignment on a character sheet, and what they mean by it. [/QUOTE]

Verification