Menu
News
All News
Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
Pathfinder
Starfinder
Warhammer
2d20 System
Year Zero Engine
Industry News
Reviews
Dragon Reflections
Columns
Weekly Digests
Weekly News Digest
Freebies, Sales & Bundles
RPG Print News
RPG Crowdfunding News
Game Content
ENterplanetary DimENsions
Mythological Figures
Opinion
Worlds of Design
Peregrine's Next
RPG Evolution
Other Columns
From the Freelancing Frontline
Monster ENcyclopedia
WotC/TSR Alumni Look Back
4 Hours w/RSD (Ryan Dancey)
The Road to 3E (Jonathan Tweet)
Greenwood's Realms (Ed Greenwood)
Drawmij's TSR (Jim Ward)
Community
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Resources
Wiki
Pages
Latest activity
Media
New media
New comments
Search media
Downloads
Latest reviews
Search resources
EN Publishing
Store
EN5ider
Adventures in ZEITGEIST
Awfully Cheerful Engine
What's OLD is NEW
Judge Dredd & The Worlds Of 2000AD
War of the Burning Sky
Level Up: Advanced 5E
Events & Releases
Upcoming Events
Private Events
Featured Events
Socials!
Twitch
YouTube
Facebook (EN Publishing)
Facebook (EN World)
Twitter
Instagram
TikTok
Podcast
Features
Top 5 RPGs Compiled Charts 2004-Present
Adventure Game Industry Market Research Summary (RPGs) V1.0
Ryan Dancey: Acquiring TSR
Q&A With Gary Gygax
D&D Rules FAQs
TSR, WotC, & Paizo: A Comparative History
D&D Pronunciation Guide
Million Dollar TTRPG Kickstarters
Tabletop RPG Podcast Hall of Fame
Eric Noah's Unofficial D&D 3rd Edition News
D&D in the Mainstream
D&D & RPG History
About Morrus
Log in
Register
What's new
Search
Search
Search titles only
By:
Forums & Topics
Forum List
Latest Posts
Forum list
*Dungeons & Dragons
Level Up: Advanced 5th Edition
D&D Older Editions
*TTRPGs General
*Pathfinder & Starfinder
EN Publishing
*Geek Talk & Media
Search forums
Chat/Discord
Menu
Log in
Register
Install the app
Install
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is it right for WoTC to moralize us in an adventure module?
JavaScript is disabled. For a better experience, please enable JavaScript in your browser before proceeding.
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an
alternative browser
.
Reply to thread
Message
<blockquote data-quote="Emoshin" data-source="post: 8932045" data-attributes="member: 7040377"><p>I agree too I think, in the sense that if we strip out alignment (which has floating definitions), then that's one less meta layer to argue about.</p><p></p><p>Theoretically, the advantage would be to make it easier/faster to reach some sort of agreement (or agreement to disagree) when you're not caught up in that meta alignment layer (here's looking at you, Batman).</p><p></p><p>That said, to keep the eye on the prize, I think we also want to be aware that "the fiction" is also subjective.</p><p></p><p>For example, say, we are arguing whether demons are capable of True Love. Even if we don't label them Chaotic Evil, my fiction in D&D says a demon could never be capable of true love, because true love is based on positive traits like empathy and compassion, something which demons are not capable of, they can only fake it at best IMO. Another person's fiction, however, might allow a demon to experience love, which opens the door to debate, and so it goes.</p><p></p><p>For a gold dragon, even if we forgo the question of alignment, my fiction says that gold dragons are predisposed to being good and kind, which includes weighing respect for mortal laws relative to other agendas. Of course, another person's fiction of a typical gold dragon may or will be quite different. Which opens the door to a potential argument, and so it goes.</p><p></p><p>Removing the alignment framework from all that is still very helpful, I think, <strong>and</strong> mindfulness that these fictions are still subjective is still a prerequisite to a productive conversation.</p></blockquote><p></p>
[QUOTE="Emoshin, post: 8932045, member: 7040377"] I agree too I think, in the sense that if we strip out alignment (which has floating definitions), then that's one less meta layer to argue about. Theoretically, the advantage would be to make it easier/faster to reach some sort of agreement (or agreement to disagree) when you're not caught up in that meta alignment layer (here's looking at you, Batman). That said, to keep the eye on the prize, I think we also want to be aware that "the fiction" is also subjective. For example, say, we are arguing whether demons are capable of True Love. Even if we don't label them Chaotic Evil, my fiction in D&D says a demon could never be capable of true love, because true love is based on positive traits like empathy and compassion, something which demons are not capable of, they can only fake it at best IMO. Another person's fiction, however, might allow a demon to experience love, which opens the door to debate, and so it goes. For a gold dragon, even if we forgo the question of alignment, my fiction says that gold dragons are predisposed to being good and kind, which includes weighing respect for mortal laws relative to other agendas. Of course, another person's fiction of a typical gold dragon may or will be quite different. Which opens the door to a potential argument, and so it goes. Removing the alignment framework from all that is still very helpful, I think, [B]and[/B] mindfulness that these fictions are still subjective is still a prerequisite to a productive conversation. [/QUOTE]
Insert quotes…
Verification
Post reply
Community
General Tabletop Discussion
*Dungeons & Dragons
Is it right for WoTC to moralize us in an adventure module?
Top