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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Lord Zardoz" data-source="post: 3970155" data-attributes="member: 704">I do not think it is horrible game design, in and of its self.  It is not great game design,  but not that bad.  As I said, players and Dm's are going to get into arguments anyway.  The only downside to alignment arguments is that they are very dependent on the perspectives of those involved.Law / Chaos is a bit more tricky than Good / Evil.  The best way to put it is to paraphrase a quote.  "I may not be able to describe what generally constitutes Lawful (or Chaotic) behaviour.  But I know it when I see it."In my own experience at the game table, alignment issues generally never come up in terms of character actions in game.  I think this is as much a consequence of the types of adventures I ran as anything else.  But even as a player instead of as a Dm, most alignment arguements are really more about arguements about in game actions by the players that are disruptive to the adventure at hand rather than any real philosophy.  I am not saying such things never happen (too many threads about Paladins killing Orc Babies to deny that).  But I do think that the issue has been exaggerated well beyond its real impact.For my own games, it sees that the general impact of most alignment issues is that if there is any significant grey area, to put it to a vote at the table.  Alignment by consensus is simple enough to deal with.  If the table decides that killing Orc Infants is ok for a Paladin, than let it slide (or be vindictive and throw a nasty encounter at them later if your the DM).  But do not hold up the game for a trivial and ultimately meaningless discussion of ethical and moral philosophy as it applies to a game.END COMMUNICATION</blockquote>

Verification