Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="swrushing" data-source="post: 1918157" data-attributes="member: 14140">Here is the catch, the thing you either miss or keep ignoring, that statement was NOT &quot;unqualified&quot;. It was VERY qualified by this statement in the intro to the nine alingment laundry listEach alignment description below depicts a typical character of that alignment. Remember that individuals vary from this norm, and that a given character may act more or less in accord with his or her alignment from day to day. Use these descriptions as guidelines, not as scripts.pay particular attention to the &quot;each alignment description below...&quot; part which sets the scope, tells you what this is qualifying.This turns that laundry list (from which you cite the ce one) from &quot;it is always true&quot; (your take) to &quot;typically&quot; and &quot;more or less&quot; and &quot;exceptions to the norm exist&quot; and from &quot;rule&quot; or &quot;script&quot; to &quot;guidelines&quot;.One cannot take the CE list as &quot;it is always true&quot; by unless one simply decides to ignore the qualifiers given above for those very alignment trait lists. yes, the DnD writers knew how to use english, and thus theu knew that a qualifiying statement specifically referring to a list below it applies to that list, and that means they do not have to repeat that qualifier again and again and again in each element of the list. Same thing here. The entire list of the nine alignments traits is QUALIFIED by the above passage. To ignore that statement and try then to treat those nine descitions as unqualified and always true is a misread of the rule, not an expression of it.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="swrushing, post: 1918157, member: 14140"] Here is the catch, the thing you either miss or keep ignoring, that statement was NOT "unqualified". It was VERY qualified by this statement in the intro to the nine alingment laundry list [b]Each alignment description below depicts a typical character of that alignment. Remember that individuals vary from this norm, and that a given character may act more or less in accord with his or her alignment from day to day. Use these descriptions as guidelines, not as scripts.[/b] pay particular attention to the "each alignment description below..." part which sets the scope, tells you what this is qualifying. This turns that laundry list (from which you cite the ce one) from [b]"it is always true"[/b] (your take) to "typically" and "more or less" and "exceptions to the norm exist" and from "rule" or "script" to "guidelines". One cannot take the CE list as "it is always true" by unless one simply decides to ignore the qualifiers given above for those very alignment trait lists. yes, the DnD writers knew how to use english, and thus theu knew that a qualifiying statement [b]specifically referring to a list below[/b] it applies to that list, and that means they do not have to repeat that qualifier again and again and again in each element of the list. Same thing here. The entire list of the nine alignments traits is QUALIFIED by the above passage. To ignore that statement and try then to treat those nine descitions as unqualified and always true is a misread of the rule, not an expression of it. [/QUOTE]

Verification