Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="ProfessorCirno" data-source="post: 4236096" data-attributes="member: 65637">No, I'm saying it's both.&nbsp; It's a moral code that exists as a representation of how your character acts.&nbsp; I've always said that the player decides the alignment, not the other way around.&nbsp; The gods literally see your alignment because 1) magic is involved, and 2) Law and Chaos, Good and Evil, as the poster above stated, these aren't just philisophical terms.&nbsp; &quot;Law&quot; is a very literal power in the world, just as real as UV rays.&nbsp; You don't SEE the law in someone, but it's there.&nbsp; That's why gods that are lawful good have to act and only approve their followers acting in a lawful good manner; they're quite literally POWERED by the forces of &quot;Law&quot; and &quot;Good.&quot;Again, people don't literally SEE your alignment (until magic gets involved), but they can get glimpses of someone else's alignment in the way they act.&nbsp; If you watch a paladin for awhile, you're going to figure out he's lawful good.&nbsp; You might not USE the phrase &quot;lawful good,&quot; but you hopefully get what I'm saying.For *most* classes, alignment is just a description on how you act.&nbsp; It changes if you begin acting differently, such as a neutral thief who goes through something horrible and decides to mend his ways.&nbsp; For *some* classes, the actual powers of Chaos, Law, Good, etc, work to empower them, either through the powers themselves, or by proxy through their god.&nbsp; And lastly, some classes are expected to act a certain way, otherwise they no longer fit they type of class (which is why you don't get a lawful barbarian, because a lawful person wouldn't run around RAAAAGGGGIIIING at people; if they did, their alignment would change more chaotic).Oh, I dunno.&nbsp; I wrote down my place of living when I got my ID how many years ago, but that's changed. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f609.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=";)" title="Wink&nbsp; &nbsp; ;)"&nbsp; data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" />My problem with 4e alignment isn't Unaligned, which I think is really a GREAT addition.&nbsp; My problem is that they cut of lot of stuff that was a neccesary part of how alignment worked, and they did it seemingly for no visible reason.&nbsp; Furthermore, I have no issues with alignment being only a part of fluff now.&nbsp; Again, my problem is that things like Lawful Evil were cut out with nothing to replace them.The problem with saying &quot;You can still be Lawful Evil, just take EVIL!&quot; is that it doesn't answer the question of &quot;why was this change made?&quot;&nbsp; Honestly, as much as people like to argue over chaotic good, I think lawful evil is the far better example, as it's STRONGLY unique amongst the other alignments.&nbsp; I suppose the big issue is, there's no nothing that differentiates between Darth Vader or a lawyer and a gangbanger who does a drive-by.&nbsp; Just forcing less choices doesn't make a system less cumbersome by default, especially if the problem with the system was never &quot;There's too many alignment choices.&quot;</blockquote>

[QUOTE="ProfessorCirno, post: 4236096, member: 65637"] No, I'm saying it's [i]both[/i]. It's a moral code that exists as a representation of how your character acts. I've always said that the player decides the alignment, not the other way around. The gods literally see your alignment because 1) magic is involved, and 2) Law and Chaos, Good and Evil, as the poster above stated, these aren't just philisophical terms. "Law" is a very literal power in the world, just as real as UV rays. You don't SEE the law in someone, but it's there. That's why gods that are lawful good have to act and only approve their followers acting in a lawful good manner; they're quite literally POWERED by the forces of "Law" and "Good." Again, people don't literally SEE your alignment (until magic gets involved), but they can get glimpses of someone else's alignment in the way they act. If you watch a paladin for awhile, you're going to figure out he's lawful good. You might not USE the phrase "lawful good," but you hopefully get what I'm saying. For *most* classes, alignment is just a description on how you act. It changes if you begin acting differently, such as a neutral thief who goes through something horrible and decides to mend his ways. For *some* classes, the actual powers of Chaos, Law, Good, etc, work to empower them, either through the powers themselves, or by proxy through their god. And lastly, some classes are expected to act a certain way, otherwise they no longer fit they type of class (which is why you don't get a lawful barbarian, because a lawful person wouldn't run around RAAAAGGGGIIIING at people; if they did, their alignment would change more chaotic). Oh, I dunno. I wrote down my place of living when I got my ID how many years ago, but that's changed. ;) My problem with 4e alignment isn't Unaligned, which I think is really a GREAT addition. My problem is that they cut of lot of stuff that was a neccesary part of how alignment worked, and they did it seemingly for no visible reason. Furthermore, I have no issues with alignment being only a part of fluff now. Again, my problem is that things like Lawful Evil were cut out with nothing to replace them. The problem with saying "You can still be Lawful Evil, just take EVIL!" is that it doesn't answer the question of "why was this change made?" Honestly, as much as people like to argue over chaotic good, I think lawful evil is the far better example, as it's STRONGLY unique amongst the other alignments. I suppose the big issue is, there's no nothing that differentiates between Darth Vader or a lawyer and a gangbanger who does a drive-by. Just [i]forcing less choices[/i] doesn't make a system less cumbersome by default, especially if the problem with the system was never "There's too many alignment choices." [/QUOTE]

Verification