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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Talislan" data-source="post: 4237742" data-attributes="member: 56858">This whole thread has me hoping that they make sure they define the meaning of Lawful, Chaotic, Neutral, Evil and Good within the realms of the rules more distinctly. Cutting down the options may be the only way they can do this in a clear and concise manner, without clogging up the rule system for the rest of the game.To me the line between good and evil is none existant except in the mind of the individual. It is a concept of belief which can never be anything other than personal. Just as this statement is just one personal view. There is no right or wrong to it except in my own minds eye.In a game though we need to be able define who are the 'good' guys and who are the 'bad'. Or more correctly, who is on your side and who is the opposition. The simpler you can make this the easier the game will flow. If this creates restrictions in what is possible then so be it. Those are the boundaries of the fantasy setting. Those restriction are one of the many elements that makes the setting and 'ordered' fantasy that everyone can play in.The Lawful/Chaotic alignment creates a more in depth experience of the roleplaying experience only. Neither sit well with the concept of good and evil because they have more concrete definitions. One is bound by a set of rules the other is bound by no rules. Whilst they can sit on either side of the good and evil fence quite comfortably, they require a ruling of there own to define who's side they are on. But in applying a simple rule to them (and effectively putting them on one side of the fence or the other) you can use them to create a set of rules for the boundaries of good and evil in the fantasy setting. Technically you could use either to pin down each end of the imaginary good and evil spectrum, but since we need rules to follow game it makes sense that the 'good' guys follow the rules of the fantasy defining what is good and chaos pins down the 'evil' that would unravel the very fabric of the fantasy world (in fantasy theory) we are playing in.In this way we are able to have imaginary rules for what is good and what is bad that everyone can work with, within the context of the fantasy. The simpler this definition of rules can be, the more easily the fantasy can be constructed through the rules of the game to suit the broadest number of potential players.The beauty of a simplfied alignment system though, is that those who wish to add to its complexity in their game can do so without the system braking the game for other potential players less concerned with knowing any more than which side they want to be on.I'm sure there are plenty of holes in my statements, feel free to pick as they are just as always imho only. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /> T.PS. Neutrals - the balance between good & evil making them the keepers of the greater good or plain evil fence sitters? <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    ;)"  data-smilie="2"data-shortname=";)" /></blockquote>

Verification