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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Whizbang Dustyboots" data-source="post: 6272366" data-attributes="member: 11760">It really looks like a lame compromise, since it has the tatters of the Chaos/Law axis clinging to it. My guess is that there were pro-grid folks and pro-G/N/E folks and whoever had to make the final call got tired of going around and around about it and went with that.But I agree: If you're going to get rid of the classic alignment system (which is sort of a dubious proposition, since the battle of good versus evil is part of D&D's DNA, even if someone chooses to play a non-participant in that war), they should really go for it, rather than take an infuriating to everyone half-step.WotC is capable of that sort of thought: The 3E Manual of the Planes and 3.5 DMG both looked carefully at what would happen if DMs started ripping out the old planar structure and the impacts on the game, which they then used with the 4E cosmology (love it or hate it). It would have been nice if that kind of thinking had been applied to the alignment system: What happens if you remove one axis? What happens if you remove it entirely? What effects are based around it? What monsters are wedded to it?Given what a problematic spell Detect Evil has been since OD&D, it seems like a serious look at the mechanical importance of alignment is long overdue inside Official D&D Design HQ. (For that matter, has any major publisher ever done so? Has Paizo done anything new with alignment?)</blockquote>

Verification