Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="AnotherGuy" data-source="post: 9250929" data-attributes="member: 7029930">I'm beginning to understand why alignment threads and the softer versions of Ideals, Bonds and Flaws of 5e were so contentious.D&amp;D players who desired a deeper connection to their characters and their relationships with others, as well as virtues and vices only had alignment to lean on which was an early undeveloped system which at best was decide by table and at worst decide by inconsistent DM.But for those that enjoyed the concept of alignment, despite how thin it was, defended it fiercely (and I was one) because there was nothing else within the game that demanded truth of character so why would I just abandon the only vestige of it within the game.VtM came along and produced Roads and Paths and the internal battle with the Beast which mechanised the above within the game. I was and am a fan of this within Vampire. It wasn't just left all to the individual player with the hope that he is true and consistent with this character. The rules themselves helped keep players in check, and it didn't lay it all at the feet of the Storyteller.The modern indie games (which I'm still learning) seem to take that a step further or at the very least polish what has come before.The question is, how much of that weight does your modern D&amp;D roleplayer want within their game where the quest is to vanquish Tiamat, survive Undermountain or assemble the Rod of 7 Parts?EDIT: For myself, who plays longer interconnecting campaigns, I welcome such rules.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="AnotherGuy, post: 9250929, member: 7029930"] I'm beginning to understand why alignment threads and the softer versions of Ideals, Bonds and Flaws of 5e were so contentious. D&D players who desired a deeper connection to their characters and their relationships with others, as well as virtues and vices only had alignment to lean on which was an early undeveloped system which at best was [I]decide by table [/I]and at worst [I]decide by[/I] [I]inconsistent DM.[/I] But for those that enjoyed the concept of alignment, despite how thin it was, defended it fiercely (and I was one) because there was nothing else within the game that demanded [U]truth of character[/U] so why would I just abandon the only vestige of it within the game. VtM came along and produced Roads and Paths and the internal battle with the Beast which mechanised the above within the game. I was and am a fan of this within Vampire. It wasn't just left all to the individual player with the hope that he is true and consistent with this character. The rules themselves helped keep players in check, and it didn't lay it all at the feet of the Storyteller. The modern indie games (which I'm still learning) seem to take that a step further or at the very least polish what has come before. The question is, how much of that weight does your modern D&D roleplayer want within their game where the quest is to vanquish Tiamat, survive Undermountain or assemble the Rod of 7 Parts? EDIT: For myself, who plays longer interconnecting campaigns, I welcome such rules. [/QUOTE]

Verification