Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Libramarian" data-source="post: 6117006" data-attributes="member: 6688858">I support the idea of something like this in a game module, but I think  it's too dependent upon fairly aggressive GM scene-framing to work well  for core.You're right that the B/X and 4e alignment systems do a better job at this--and I think this is why B/X alignment is broadly favored by the OSR--but I think the fact that AD&D alignment has pretentions to being able to categorize all ethical perspectives ever within its system is only relevant if that's taken seriously, which it definitely isn't in my group. So I think recognizing the absurdity of that is enough for it to function as a box.I don't think that the choices to be made in-game are supposed to be  where the admirable decisions are made--it's the commitment at the  beginning to be a Paladin (accepting that this limits your options in  the coming game) that is the admirable decision. It should be obvious  how to play a proper Paladin in-game, because the more restricted your  choices are in-game, the more heft your commitment to play one at the  beginning of the game has. That's the argument for the traditional Pally anyway. I see how this makes it a gam/sim mechanic rather than a narrativist one, but that works for me and makes sense in the context of 1-3e.</blockquote>