Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Hillsy7" data-source="post: 7170988" data-attributes="member: 6689191">After listening to Matt Colville explain his view on Alignment I was thinking how I’ve been describing alignment to myself when thinking about character motivations and how I view players at the table (I only have a couple of PbP games I’m GM-ing, so I haven’t got round to an pre-game alignment discussion routine). I came to realise I have a very precise view on how the 2 axis of alignment (Law-Chaos, Good-Evil) interact, and that’s it’s not just different from Matt Colville’s, but also from the differing ways I’ve heard alignment talked about. For me both axis are continuums; I can put my character motivations largely anywhere. For some people the 9 options are encompassing descriptions – you have to be in one of the nine. Other’s only use 1 of the 2 axis – and I suspect other people uses a third or fourth. So I’d be interested to hear how everyone else personally views alignment, and how they bring that to the table as a player or GM – and if you are a GM, do you press that view early on and insist players follow it, or do you only deal with it if the characters behaviour gets too far out of tolerance?[HR][/HR]Also, I’d like to keep this as a conversational, pleasant thread – So if you’re intending to rubbish someone else’s viewpoint directly or through inference (e.g. “I find the whole Law-Chaos thing dumb, pointless, and ruins games”, which infers that anyone who really likes the Law-Chaos distinction is a bit of an idiot), or the alignment system in general. I can’t stop you, but I’d kindly ask you to keep your thoughts to yourself, and go start your own post. This is ideally a celebration of how people use alignment to enhance and define their games – not a heroic tale of how your personal brilliance overcame the evil tyranny of alignment</blockquote>

Verification