Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Celebrim" data-source="post: 6267166" data-attributes="member: 4937">Sure, but I'm saying that the 3.5 rules are literally incoherent, in that the answer we would come up with depends entirely on which section of the rules we are quoting.&nbsp; The description of LN IMO contridicts the description given for Law in the section on Law!&nbsp; If I quote the section on law, you'd never get the idea of a 'personal code'.&nbsp;&nbsp; Yet this strange concept shows up in the section on LN.&nbsp; Is the personal code externally reviewable, understandable and subject to enforcement?&nbsp;&nbsp; If so, the 'personal code' isn't personal.&nbsp;&nbsp; But if the 'personal code' is not externally reviewable, is not understandable to anyone but the one that holds it, and is not enforceable, then exactly where you have to put that depends on the nature of the code - probably CG, CN, or CE depending on the details.&nbsp; Fairies of myth after all follow codes, and there are all sorts of stories about tricking or placating fairies by having knowledge of their code.&nbsp;&nbsp; But one would not thereby claim that the fairies are 'Lawful Neutral'.&nbsp; Utlimately, the notion of 'follows a code' is a bit of a red herring.&nbsp;&nbsp; All alignments follow some sort of code of conduct, even if it is only, &quot;Always look out for your own interests.&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp; Madness of the 'antic disposition' sort, falls under CN precisely because it reflects the idea of a completely incomprehensible and unreviewable personal code.&nbsp;&nbsp; Madness of say the sociopathy sort, isn't CN, but that's another conversation.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Celebrim, post: 6267166, member: 4937"] Sure, but I'm saying that the 3.5 rules are literally incoherent, in that the answer we would come up with depends entirely on which section of the rules we are quoting. The description of LN IMO contridicts the description given for Law in the section on Law! If I quote the section on law, you'd never get the idea of a 'personal code'. Yet this strange concept shows up in the section on LN. Is the personal code externally reviewable, understandable and subject to enforcement? If so, the 'personal code' isn't personal. But if the 'personal code' is not externally reviewable, is not understandable to anyone but the one that holds it, and is not enforceable, then exactly where you have to put that depends on the nature of the code - probably CG, CN, or CE depending on the details. Fairies of myth after all follow codes, and there are all sorts of stories about tricking or placating fairies by having knowledge of their code. But one would not thereby claim that the fairies are 'Lawful Neutral'. Utlimately, the notion of 'follows a code' is a bit of a red herring. All alignments follow some sort of code of conduct, even if it is only, "Always look out for your own interests." Madness of the 'antic disposition' sort, falls under CN precisely because it reflects the idea of a completely incomprehensible and unreviewable personal code. Madness of say the sociopathy sort, isn't CN, but that's another conversation. [/QUOTE]

Verification