Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="The Sigil" data-source="post: 150860" data-attributes="member: 2013">Disagree...I have to disagree with this.&nbsp; It is necessary and &quot;built-in&quot; to the game to have absolute good and evil (e.g., a paladin who commits an evil act loses paladin abilities until he atones... you must have a &quot;list&quot;, even if unwritten, of &quot;evil acts&quot; or the statement loses its meaning).That said, it should be pointed out that all campaigns need not have the same absolutes... in fact, the absolutes will probably reflect the morals of the DM and/or players (but more probably the DM, since he is the adjudicator).&nbsp; Obviously, what a specific campaign defines as evil will vary...Borrowing an example from the d20 Publishers thread, one campaign might define drawings of topless women in printed publications as evil.&nbsp; In another campaign, this might be a neutral act (or even a good one).&nbsp; This is fine and accepted.The same act committed under the same circumstances may be judged evil/good/lawful/chaotic in one campaign and judged differently in another campaign.&nbsp; However, the same act under the same circumstances should not be sometimes judged evil/good/lawful/chaotic and sometimes not within the bounds of the *same* campaign.--The Sigil</blockquote>

[QUOTE="The Sigil, post: 150860, member: 2013"] [b]Disagree...[/b] I have to disagree with this. It is necessary and "built-in" to the game to have absolute good and evil (e.g., a paladin who commits an evil act loses paladin abilities until he atones... you must have a "list", even if unwritten, of "evil acts" or the statement loses its meaning). That said, it should be pointed out that all campaigns need not have the same absolutes... in fact, the absolutes will probably reflect the morals of the DM and/or players (but more probably the DM, since he is the adjudicator). Obviously, what a specific campaign defines as evil will vary... Borrowing an example from the d20 Publishers thread, one campaign might define drawings of topless women in printed publications as evil. In another campaign, this might be a neutral act (or even a good one). This is fine and accepted. The same act committed under the same circumstances may be judged evil/good/lawful/chaotic in one campaign and judged differently in another campaign. However, the same act under the same circumstances should not be sometimes judged evil/good/lawful/chaotic and sometimes not within the bounds of the *same* campaign. --The Sigil [/QUOTE]

Verification