Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="jsaving" data-source="post: 4229279" data-attributes="member: 16726">Sure, not a problem.  LG sees an orderly society as the best way to promote the good of all, CG sees maximal freedom as the best way to unlock human potentials, G doesn't see either one as absolute and just wants whatever helps the most people.  Huge difference between CG and NG, huge difference between LG and NG, no reason to call out LG as a uniquely special variant of goodness.Similarly, LE sees an orderly society as the best way to ensure everyone gets what they deserve, CE sees maximal freedom as the best way to do it, E doesn't see either one as abolute and just wants whatever oppresses the most people.  Huge difference between CE and NE, huge difference between LE and NE, no reason to call out CE as a uniquely special variant of evil.What a lot of people are afraid of is that 4e will opt for the more confining notion of law = honor, because honor, at least as D&D defines the term, contains some real-world sins like lying and hence doesn't belong in the law/chaos axis at all.  If a law = honor setup were to be adopted, then of course CG would need to be dropped as no one would want to play a character who actually hates honor, which is what CG would have to mean in such a framework.  But that just shows why law = honor is a bad idea, at least in my view.</blockquote>