There’s a difference between your alignment dictating what actions your character should take, forcing you to do things and the decision to actively lean into a certain character mindsetSo that second sentence, the one from your original post, is why people think that.
Isn't being LE a requirement for being a DM? Or was that only Gygax's law?Internet discussion board debates do not necessarily correlate to individual groups. I've never had an argument in my group.
But that may be because I'm a Lawful Evil DM and they wouldn't dare challenge my adherence to the traditional alignment system in my games.
Yeah I think this is a "phrasing" issue.Interesting... I specifically included that sentence to show it wasn't a forced decision. To me it would go something like:
Group votes on Chaotic Good.
Me: Huh, I had originally thought of my wizard as Neutral Good.
Group: He seems very anti-establisment.
Me: You're right, I think I want to play more into that. (Changes alignment to Chaotic Good.)
OR
Me: I think I'm going to lighten up on that and focus on his altruism. (Keeps alignment as Neutral Good.)
Sure, but it's still questionable. Why lean into an alignment, specifically, which historically have been poorly-defined and not entirely believable, when you could lean into a character and let their personality inform the alignment? I feel like that's a real question which needs to be answered. If your game is somehow "about" alignment it might make more sense, but in the general context of D&D it doesn't make a whole lot, on first glance anyway.There’s a difference between your alignment dictating what actions your character should take, forcing you to do things and the decision to actively lean into a certain character mindset
Alignment isn't a box, though. There isn't a "Play original or adjust to new" choice here. Someone who is CG is just mostly in that box, but can be significantly outside of it with various behaviors. Say someone is 55% CG, 25% NG and 20% LN(has a personal code), that person would be CG, but with significant amounts of his personality that fall outside of CG.Interesting... I specifically included that sentence to show it wasn't a forced decision. To me it would go something like:
Group votes on Chaotic Good.
Me: Huh, I had originally thought of my wizard as Neutral Good.
Group: He seems very anti-establisment.
Me: You're right, I think I want to play more into that. (Changes alignment to Chaotic Good.)
OR
Me: I think I'm going to lighten up on that and focus on his altruism. (Keeps alignment as Neutral Good.)
I am desperate to know what X was in the context of the example, but I suspect most of it won't be stuff like this, but rather people getting into really circular/pointless arguments about the L/N/C alignments or trying to argue the toss about whether something is actually "Good" or not.Here's the scenario I foresee (because I've seen it happen):
"Hey Bob, I think your character is evil."
"How do you figure that?"
"He does X. X is evil."
"I have him do X because X is Good."
"Nope. X is evil."
"My family does X. That is literally our family business. X is a deeply and reverently held tradition for us. Also, you do realize most people do X. The DM did X right before we started the game. Gary is doing X right now!"
"Welp... I'll just let that accusation hang in the air. Hope everyone isn't feeling attacked or uncomfortable right now and the game isn't poisoned by this knowledge of how I see all of you hanging over our heads."
I've seen that, but it's very rare and I haven't seen it since 1e/2e.Here's the scenario I foresee (because I've seen it happen):
"Hey Bob, I think your character is evil."
"How do you figure that?"
"He does X. X is evil."
"I have him do X because X is Good."
"Nope. X is evil."
"My family does X. That is literally our family business. X is a deeply and reverently held tradition for us. Also, you do realize most people do X. The DM did X right before we started the game. Gary is doing X right now!"
"Welp... I'll just let that accusation hang in the air. Hope everyone isn't feeling attacked or uncomfortable right now and the game isn't poisoned by this knowledge of how I see all of you hanging over our heads."
I once played with a DM who didn't have the monsters stab downed (0 HP) characters!Isn't being LE a requirement for being a DM? Or was that only Gygax's law?
Probably something to the effect ofI am desperate to know what X was in the context of the example, but I suspect most of it won't be stuff like this, but rather people getting into really circular/pointless arguments about the L/N/C alignments or trying to argue the toss about whether something is actually "Good" or not.
It's been over way more innocuous things than the Punisher's status as Actual Villain.Probably something to the effect of
“I can’t believe you murdered those men in cold blood”
“They were thieves and criminals, it was an act of justice”
“They had surrendered to us willingly, it was our duty to deliver them to the guards safely”
“Their crimes were too numerous, to let them live would be a crime in itself”
“You’re just a bloodthirsty thug”
“Lies and slander, I am a noble warrior of what is right and good”
and so on and so forth...
My thought is that "X" in the post should be changed to "#2"I am desperate to know what X was in the context of the example
Having or not having alignment doesn't alter this in the least. Good and evil are in the real world and people understand(or have a good idea) which is which. You can get rid of alignment and if someone walks up to a little old lady crossing the street and hack her down, my PC is going to call him an evil bastard and that statement will have 0 to do with alignment. Same with me as a player saying that what the player's PC did was evil. Still nothing to do with alignment.When you get to call someone's actions good or evil everyone's weird moral hangups come online.
Except this thread has nothing to do with having or not having an alignment, and everything to do with expressly encouraging other players to judge the actions of other people's characters as Good or Evil in an open forum for all of their roleplay, not just extremes people like to use to justify 'real' alignment.Having or not having alignment doesn't alter this in the least. Good and evil are in the real world and people understand(or have a good idea) which is which. You can get rid of alignment and if someone walks up to a little old lady crossing the street and hack her down, my PC is going to call him an evil bastard and that statement will have 0 to do with alignment. Same with me as a player saying that what the player's PC did was evil. Still nothing to do with alignment.