NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 5689822" data-attributes="member: 4937">Yes, this is true and one of the most important points you can make about the alignment system.  To a fairly large extent, the same sort of confusion exists around the description of the Good/Evil axis.So anyone who considers the alignment system must do one of the following:1) Play with a loose intuitive understanding of it, but don't pay too much attention to it.  This will mean you will need to either avoid characters whose behavior depends on precise understanding of the system (like Paladins), because if you have those sorts of characters it will lead to arguments or play those characters anyway but pay only loose attention to alignment issues anyway. Or play those chracters and argue about it. Most groups probably do this.2) Note the description given amongst the various books and examples is junk because as described, it gives no useful information about the character.  Drop alignment as useless.  Get on the internet and complain bitterly about the alignment system whenever it is mentioned.  This is probably the second most popular option.3) Decide that the problem is not that alignment can't describe something really interesting and useful, but rather that the people writing about the subject were coming from too many different perspectives or simply didn't have a lot of deep understanding of the problem, or if they did - weren't able to convey.  On the basis of what is hinted at by the terms and the games discussion of them, work out for yourself an internally consistant description of the alignments that provides useful information while doesn't constrain you to playing unrealistic sterotypes.   Get on the internet.  Engage in heated discussions with the people in group #2 above about the utility of alignment.  This is probably the second most popular option.4) Decide that descriptions aren't internally contridictory afterall and that the game really intends for you to play simplisticfantasy sterotypes.  Therefore all lawfuls are methodical, work in large communities, put others first, serve the forces of order, and have a code they are following, while all chaotics are the complete opposite - impulsive, loners, who put themselves first, have situational ethics, and serve the forces of chaos.  This is probably a more common take than some people realize, its just that the groups doing this can be superficially similar to group #1 or even group #3.  Indeed, arguably this is exactly the way that the D&D Basic game with its single axis of law/chaos intends characters to be played.I'm in group #3.  I think that the two axis alignment system is very fascinating, but that you can hardly blame people for throwing it out given how poorly its been explained and developed over the years.  Since I had to work out the system early on, I went with just the very basic descriptions in the 1st edition PH and worked out a complex system on that basis on my own.  Of the above ways the law/chaos axis have been described, none are sufficient, some are confusing, and in most cases they are irrelevant as I see the axis.</blockquote>

Verification