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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Geron Raveneye" data-source="post: 1918137" data-attributes="member: 2268">First off, thanks for making me feel like I'm actually helping an interesting discussion go along. <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f600.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":D" title="Big grin    :D"  data-smilie="8"data-shortname=":D" /> I have to get a better grasp on the D&D alignment system myself right now, as one of my players actually has taken his first level in the paladin class last game, that's why I'm interested in alignment discussions here at the moment. No no, it's quite okay to be picky..."intent" and "operational function" are two different expressions after all.Let me try to make clear what is giving me some..well, not problems, but maybe wrong associations...when I read the words "level of operational function", "proscriptive" and "rational player"When you talk about a "level of operational function", it always makes me think of a level of D&D where only the bare rules as written interact with each other, like some kind of clockwork mechanism, without any room for interpretation. I don't know if that's what you mean, but it's the impression I get."Proscriptive" to me simply has the association of, in this case a rule, forcing my character to take certain actions because he fits into this rule...like forcing him to act in a certain way because he has a certain alignment, and not in any other way. That's why I tried to differentiate between "proscriptive" and "descriptive" To take a simple example: drowning. A human being, without any technical or magical support, is not able to breathe water, in fact it will die from suffocation if it tries, effectively drown. Is drowning "proscriptive" now, forbidding the act of trying to breathe water, or is it "descriptive", telling you the consequences of trying to breathe water without forbidding it? I agree, for many it's one and the same...but there's enough people every year actually drowning voluntarily...proving it's not forbidden, only deadly. I apologize in forehand to anybody who might feel uncomfortably touched by this example, it's not meant as such. This can be compared to the extreme alignment example, the paladin. For a paladin, all his class features are a natural function of his being a paladin..like breathing for a human being. He is not forbidden to in an evil manner...he will simply cease being a paladin.When you mention "rational players", I wonder who that might be. If a player tells me his character is acting in such and such way because his alignment makes him, I can only say he's got the concept wrong, because alignment doesn't enforce behaviour, it adjudicates what has happened. Of course, an alignment restriction on a character class means the character will lose that class' powers if he acted a certain way...but it doesn't keep the character from doing it anyway? The point with those alignment restricted character classes is that they come with a built-in set of motivational rules that explain what a druid, monk or paladin is, why he's got special powers, and where they come from..and what happens if you break those "behaviour rules".Hope you don't mind me clarifying why I was trying to make the difference between "proscriptive" and "descriptive". I'm sure it wasn't your intention, but your posts made it kinda sound like you see alignment and characters like robots that are preprogrammed. In fact, it's the respective classes giving a rough preprogramming, in my opinion.Dunno if you read my example of a chaotic and a lawful group forming up, and how I see the inner workings. I don't know either if you think it a valid example, but in my eyes, both groups sounded pretty efficient to me...in different ways, granted, but I bet both groups would fulfill their objective. <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=":)" /> I admit, both were good in alignment. With chaotic evil, you always run into the problem that you try to form a group of people that only mainly care for themselves, look out for their own greatest profit without scruples, and that don't care for given words, authority of others or set rules.I'm curious as to why you thought you'd have to change his alignment for him to achieve his goal in a rational and efficient manner? <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=":)" /> Rational and efficient are usually also points of view influenced by one's personality, what one views as "rational" and "efficient", right? Try to get into that duke's mind first, taking into account that his personality has caused his alignment to become chaotic evil, and from that point of view, try to see what methods he would think of as "efficient" to achieve his goals...and I'm pretty sure you'll find a few, too. <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/devious.png"  class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":]" title="Devious    :]" data-shortname=":]" /></blockquote>

Verification