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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="WizarDru" data-source="post: 935144" data-attributes="member: 151">I'm not buying it, I'm afraid.  A few quick comments:  <ul> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Typo in the first line.  I assume you meant 'apparent', not 'apart'.  No biggie, just thought you might want to fix that.</li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Quoting about.com weakens your case, especially when you their quote doesn't make sense.  You would have been better served using <a href="http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=alignment" target="_blank">dicitionary.com, at the least.</a></li> <li data-xf-list-type="ul">Your opening sentence makes a claim and doesn't support it, and condenses 5+ years into a single action.  Your second sentence muddies the waters further, without explaining wjy you think they felt the system was necessary.</li> </ul>Regardless, you're examples make the classic mistake of a top-down approach to alignment.  That is to say, you assume that alignment guides behavior, not the other way around.  Further, you make the assumption that alignment indicates rigid adherance to a code, not a general pattern of behavior.Note that word, GENERAL.   A lawful character can bend the rules occasionally, just as a chaotic one can follow them, regardless of how enthusiastically or begrudgingly.  Alignment follows behavior, it doesn't dictate it.  Even the paladin, cleric and monk have the options of violating their personal codes....but at the cost of their abilities.   Nevertheless, the choice remains to them.  Alignment can and does change.Alignment, in general, is quite vague, and allows a lot of variance.  Take a look at Sepulchrave's Story Hour.  LG is a pretty broad category, despite what some might think.Now, as to your scenarios involving conflicting agendas, let's return to the SRD:Terrorists who kill innocents are EVIL.  They may not think they are, but they are.  Their outlook is irrelevant to the action commited.  Good doesn't mean pacifism, but terroristic murder of innocents does mean evil.  Staring into the abyss will do that to you.  The crusades had far less to do with religion and far more to do with economics, and isn't really comparable.  D&D, as a game, accepts a certain degree of morality from which it will not budge.  Murder is, generally, considered evil.  If you enforce moral relativism, then there is NO evil, since everything can be made relative.The greatest flaw of the rant is that it makes no suggestion how to redress or replace the system it claims to be flawed.  It doesn't address why such a system was considered necessary in the past, or why it no longer is, now.  Without addressing such issues, the whole context of the rant is lost.  Mentioning casually that it should be removed and some miracle of game mechanics should occur to replace it isn't really a terribly compelling argument, especially since you haven't explained why it's a problem in the first place.Your LN gods example doesn't really make much sense, to me, Technology is more than just steam engines, and nature is more than just trees.  Further, the two don't have to be mutually exclusive.  Your example of 'raping the land' is a loaded argument, and makes the assumption that technology is the same as the industrial revolution, as opposed to the centuries of technology that predated it.  Meanwhile, nature isn't about unending growth, it's about cycles, balances and ecosystems.  Forest fires are a necessary part of an ecosystem, just as regrowth is.  Wetlands and dams can coexist without being enemies.  Mind you, I'm not sure why you'd make a nature diety a LN one, but that's up to you.In short, your rant's fu was weak, to me.</blockquote>

Verification