Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Man in the Funny Hat" data-source="post: 8924560" data-attributes="member: 32740">I never personally had any problem understanding how I as a player should handle my character's alignment, nor how as a DM I should use it to keep PC's on the up-and-up and guide the behavior and choices of monsters.&nbsp; What I had a problem with were EVERYONE ELSE'S whacked idea about what it all meant and how to use it to suck the fun out of the game for the players and use it as a means to DICTATE to them how to play their PC's.I spent a lot of years reading pointless, endless debates on it.&nbsp; I actually READ what the books had to say from one edition to the next (which few actually do - and IF they do, they aren't often HELPED by doing so as alignment as presented by the rules has always been absolute crap, from OD&amp;D onwards). I then wrote out MY views; MY conclusions on what alignment WAS FOR and how to use it.&nbsp;&nbsp; That helped to be able to find phrasing to explain my views to others (if they foolishly actually ask me to, &quot;explain how YOU handle it.&quot;)&nbsp; However, there are just too many unshakably held opinions on alignment; some good, but more bad than good.&nbsp; Most are IRRELEVANT because the only opinion that actually matters is that of the DM you're gaming under.&nbsp; Anyone can crow theory from the mountaintops all they like, but the rubber hits the road where players actually have to run characters through a given DM's game.Here's the fun test.&nbsp; Ask 100 people to define what alignment is FOR in the game.&nbsp; You'll be lucky to get 25 answers to substantively agree.&nbsp; Without near universal agreement and understanding on that simple question (What's alignment in the game FOR?) you're not going to get agreement on HOW it should do anything, much less WHY anyone thinks it should do something in any particular way.&nbsp; Even when there IS agreement, the majority of opinions on functionality still aren't going to match.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Man in the Funny Hat, post: 8924560, member: 32740"] I never personally had any problem understanding how I as a player should handle my character's alignment, nor how as a DM I should use it to keep PC's on the up-and-up and guide the behavior and choices of monsters. What I had a problem with were EVERYONE ELSE'S whacked idea about what it all meant and how to use it to suck the fun out of the game for the players and use it as a means to DICTATE to them how to play their PC's. I spent a lot of years reading pointless, endless debates on it. I actually READ what the books had to say from one edition to the next (which few actually do - and IF they do, they aren't often HELPED by doing so as alignment as presented by [I]the rules[/I] has always been absolute crap, from OD&D onwards). I then wrote out MY views; MY conclusions on what alignment WAS FOR and how to use it. That helped to be able to find phrasing to explain my views to others (if they foolishly actually ask me to, "explain how YOU handle it.") However, there are just too many unshakably held opinions on alignment; some good, but more bad than good. Most are IRRELEVANT because the only opinion that actually matters is that of the DM you're gaming under. Anyone can crow theory from the mountaintops all they like, but the rubber hits the road where players actually have to run characters through a given DM's game. Here's the fun test. Ask 100 people to define what alignment is FOR in the game. You'll be lucky to get 25 answers to substantively agree. Without near universal agreement and understanding on that simple question (What's alignment in the game FOR?) you're not going to get agreement on HOW it should do anything, much less WHY anyone thinks it should do something in any particular way. Even when there IS agreement, the majority of opinions on functionality still aren't going to match. [/QUOTE]

Verification