D&D General If the Alignment system itself had an Alignment, what Alignment would it be?

If the Alignment system itself had an Alignment, what Alignment would it be?


  • Poll closed .

log in or register to remove this ad




If it's an aid to some, neutral to others and an active hinderance to others, then its status as an aid is indeed questionable.
No, it isn't. If it can aid even one person, then it is an aid to roleplay. Period. It's effectiveness is questionable, but the fact that it is an aid is not. And the only time I've ever seen it be a hinderance is when people are playing it wrong(wrong being not as written). It's not a straightjacket.
 
Last edited:

No, it isn't. If it can aid even one person, then it is an aid to roleplay. Period. It's effectiveness is questionable, but the fact that it is an aid is not. And the only time I've ever seen it be a hinderance is when people are playing it wrong(wrong being not as written). It's not a straightjacket.

Right, badwrongfun (TM) is bad.

Equally bad is core-assumptions of alignment restrictions or assumptions that alignment is part of the world. I for one am happy that alignments are now out of the stat blocks of monsters and out of classes and lineages and in the chapters on roleplaying in the PHB and DMG where it belongs.
 

No, it isn't. If it can aid even one person, then it is an aid to roleplay. Period. It's effectiveness is questionable, but the fact that it is an aid is not. And the only time I've ever seen it be a hinderance is when people are playing it wrong(wrong being not as written). It's not a straightjacket.
Semantic will not carry the day for you this time. Placebos are a 'cure' for some people some of the time. Doesn't make them a cure.

And 'not as written' is a fun way to talk about some of the most poorly written rules in each edition it appears in. Even the alignment defenders end up highlighting how pathetically subjective it is as they declare that everyone else is just not doing it right (ie: their way).
 

Right, badwrongfun (TM) is bad.
Which is not what I said. It just means that you are not playing alignment the way it is intended. If you create the problem, then the problem is with you, not alignment. If you play alignment and it's a hinderance, that's on you for making it one. Played the way it was intended, it's just a non-straightjacket roleplaying aid.
 

Semantic will not carry the day for you this time. Placebos are a 'cure' for some people some of the time. Doesn't make them a cure.
There are no semantics going on here............or anything that could resemble a placebo. If you change alignment to make it a hinderance(straightjacket or alignment mechanics), that's on you, not alignment.
 

Lawful Evil. Evil because the powers that enforce the criteria have a set of metrics they intentionally apply to everyone regardless of culture or intent (beyond intent that can be determined by said powerful beings). Yes, the powers are effectively You the DM, but in-setting those powers are actual forces that pass judgement.
 

Remove ads

Top