Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Voadam" data-source="post: 2496928" data-attributes="member: 2209">1) It is possible to think the society you are in is oppresive and think that if it is torn down then society would be better. It is possible to think that as nice as your personal needs are taken care of by your society, it is overall unjust and should be overthrown. Since the emphasis is fully on the collective and not personal needs of any individual wouldn't that be lawful under your definition?2) If your view is that individuals given freedom will be bad and that laws are simply a tool for the betterment of individuals &quot;for their own good&quot; then the primary emphasis is on the individual and laws and restrictions are only a means to the end of dealing with individuals. Collective needs do not need to be part of the equation. So focusing on individuals but using laws to better individuals, wouldn't that be chaotic under your definition?Alignment definitions can be turned to support almost any position. Therefore I don't sweat them as far as PC behaviour in my games. PCs self identify and then that is good enough for me. For magic and outsiders and cosmic elements it is a different matter that can allow for good story and thematics, but I don't really care how my PCs see themselves in alignment.It may also be how I have no problem in my group with the CN arcane trickster going along with the exalted druid, the paladin, and NG cleric on heroic adventures. Alignment comes into play for supernatural effects, but otherwise no big deal IMC.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Voadam, post: 2496928, member: 2209"] 1) It is possible to think the society you are in is oppresive and think that if it is torn down then society would be better. It is possible to think that as nice as your personal needs are taken care of by your society, it is overall unjust and should be overthrown. Since the emphasis is fully on the collective and not personal needs of any individual wouldn't that be lawful under your definition? 2) If your view is that individuals given freedom will be bad and that laws are simply a tool for the betterment of individuals "for their own good" then the primary emphasis is on the individual and laws and restrictions are only a means to the end of dealing with individuals. Collective needs do not need to be part of the equation. So focusing on individuals but using laws to better individuals, wouldn't that be chaotic under your definition? Alignment definitions can be turned to support almost any position. Therefore I don't sweat them as far as PC behaviour in my games. PCs self identify and then that is good enough for me. For magic and outsiders and cosmic elements it is a different matter that can allow for good story and thematics, but I don't really care how my PCs see themselves in alignment. It may also be how I have no problem in my group with the CN arcane trickster going along with the exalted druid, the paladin, and NG cleric on heroic adventures. Alignment comes into play for supernatural effects, but otherwise no big deal IMC. [/QUOTE]

Verification