Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Oofta" data-source="post: 8445592" data-attributes="member: 6801845">That seems like quite the circular argument you have there.  People like me complain that it's bad so therefore it's bad.  I'd say it's an appeal to the masses fallacy, but I don't think the masses agree.A lot of D&D is implemented differently at different tables.  I don't see that as an issue and I don't think removing alignment would solve anything.  We'd just find something else.  But you also seem to primarily be complaining about versions of the game that were last current decades ago.  I guess I don't really see the point of calling out BoVD, it was published nearly 20 years ago and was never a core book.I agree that the implementation specifics of alignment have changed and for the most part for the better. I've pretty much always used it like 5E explicitly states now - just a general guideline, one aspect of many that can be used for role playing.  We can't change the past and some DMs are always going to emphasize some aspect of the game that some players do not like. I don't see why people care about the current version.   <img class="smilie smilie--emoji" alt="🤷‍♂️" src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f937-2642.png" title="Man shrugging    :man_shrugging:" data-shortname=":man_shrugging:" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" /></blockquote>