Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="fusangite" data-source="post: 1114755" data-attributes="member: 7240">Well, I tried to piece together what was being articulated in the post that started this discussion but I'm still not sure what Jurgen was attempting to articulate beyond the obvious statement that alignment is a bad idea requiring significant readjustment. The short chart Jurgen offers is also a bit mystifying in that the term "community-minded" is associated with both goodness and law. In my campaigns, generally, I mitigate the awfulness and ridiculousness of alignment by viewing it in a kind of Cold War sense. In the Cold War, everyone was either Communist, Capitalist or Non-Aligned. In this sense, alignment was pretty much de-coupled from actual conduct as well as from intentions, it was simply a question of which "side" one was on. Generally, this is how I cope with alignment; people are on a particular side and, to some degree, their side's values affect their conduct but they are not the primary determinant of said conduct.While it is true that evil people/creatures are more likely to lie, steal, torture and kill than good people, conduct distinctions are not absolute. As in Urbis, evil people might be naturally over-represented in the highest offices in the land were it not for the fact that most of the gods, as well as the state religion, are non-evil.I too look forward to the day that alignment is removed from D&D and replaced with mechanics more easily adjustable to different types of campaign worlds. I'm not going to come out categorically against alignment, though; some worlds like the worlds of Warhammer and Runequest have a strong Law vs. Chaos dynamic that needs to be modeled in game terms.</blockquote>

Verification