Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Traveon Wyvernspur" data-source="post: 5683958" data-attributes="member: 73201">Interesting conversation going on here on what people think breaks the game systems with alignment mechanics. I've always just thought of alignments as a simple and easy to use tool to help keep the players in character and thinking about what their character would do. I never penalized a character for not acting strictly within &quot;alignment specs&quot;, unless it was something he did flagrantly such as a LG Paladin (lets say of Justice) walking up and slitting the throat of a evil NPC after it was already restrained instead of taking him in for judgement. In that case as a DM, I'd rule that his god has become angry with him and he would lose some paladin powers, perhaps not get his lay on hands until he has a penance of some sort or quest to appease the god. In the case of the berserker and a DM ruling he had to always being a mayhem making brute, that is wrong to me. I'd have ruled that only while in a fight does he go into a rage and break necks, chairs, and puppies.So it should only be a guideline for the player to get in character and a DM to use remind a player that they may want to think about what their character would do with that particular alignment in that particular situation before doing something that would seem to be out of character.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Traveon Wyvernspur, post: 5683958, member: 73201"] Interesting conversation going on here on what people think breaks the game systems with alignment mechanics. I've always just thought of alignments as a simple and easy to use tool to help keep the players in character and thinking about what their character would do. I never penalized a character for not acting strictly within "alignment specs", unless it was something he did flagrantly such as a LG Paladin (lets say of Justice) walking up and slitting the throat of a evil NPC after it was already restrained instead of taking him in for judgement. In that case as a DM, I'd rule that his god has become angry with him and he would lose some paladin powers, perhaps not get his lay on hands until he has a penance of some sort or quest to appease the god. In the case of the berserker and a DM ruling he had to always being a mayhem making brute, that is wrong to me. I'd have ruled that only while in a fight does he go into a rage and break necks, chairs, and puppies. So it should only be a guideline for the player to get in character and a DM to use remind a player that they may want to think about what their character would do with that particular alignment in that particular situation before doing something that would seem to be out of character. [/QUOTE]

Verification