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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 1919442" data-attributes="member: 7240">So, if everything was modal/conditional in the descriptions anyway, why did they specifically use modal/conditional language 17 times? If they do not need to repeat it, why do they do so 17 times but apply conditional and modal language to only a portion of the total text? I understand that. Every second post you accuse me of asserting that this is about single events and not collections of events. At no time have I ever said that we were talking about isolated events and I have stated on more than 10 occasions that I am specifically not talking about isolated events. We are talking about behaviour not single actions. Behaviour is the aggregate of individual actions over time. We have all agreed repeatedly that this thread is about behaviour. Again, I'm getting rather cross. We are not arguing about the definition of alignment. We are arguing about its operational function. I do not care about alignment on a definitional level -- I am only interested in how it causes people to operate.The above statements are not operationally true if you concede, as you just did, that alignment has predictive value. If a monster with a Lawful Evil alignment is in no way predisposed to act in a Lawful Evil way, what you say above is true. But you have just conceded that NPCs with a particular alignment are predisposed to maintain this alignment.And you're employing this quotation to refute what I am saying? I suppose we could make this thread about one in a million situations but what would be the point?Good. Now we're getting somewhere. Now we get to the general point I was making. While your theory of alignment only "describing" a PC's past and not acting on the individual's future or restricting their choices does not violate the letter of the rules, I think there are a number of reasons to suspect that this is not the most likely interpretation of the rules. If you work with the alignment mechanic the way I initially read it, it applies in the same way to every creature in the D&D universe. To run the alignment rules the way you suggest, the following things happen at the operational level:(a) alignment functions to restrict choice for some PCs and not others(b) alignment functions radically differently for PCs and NPCs in that it is predictive for NPCs but not for PCs(c) creatures with the always alignment descriptor interact differently with the mechanic from other PCs and NPCsWhile your solution buys a lot of free will without violating the letter of the rules, you can see that it is by no means the obvious way to do things, what with the rules never actually saying to run alignment the way you do.</blockquote>

Verification