Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="JamesonCourage" data-source="post: 6121973" data-attributes="member: 6668292">Well, yes, but any limitation on any character puts limits on what you can do with said character in the game.At any rate, take your mercy example. My players could definitely explore the morality issue here. They might say "it's not Good, but it's right." Then, they might grapple with whether or not it's worth doing, even if Paladin powers are lost, gods are upset, etc. This is the exact type of moral exploration that can happen even with alignment "defining" the fictional morality. Sure, in the fictional reality, that type of mercy isn't matching with the tangible "Good" in the game, but it tells us nothing about whether or not it's the right thing to do. And, as far as I know, exploring whether or not it's the right thing to do is what we might be looking for at certain points here, yes?In my game, this isn't too far off. In my personal spin (the canon of my old 3.X game) of D&D, the first gods were pushed (by Asmodeus) to define "evil" so that people knew what "good" was. After much debate, they settled on their definitions, and it was signed into the core of the multiverse by signing a contract in Asmodeus' blood. This became "Good" and "Evil", definitions which Asmodeus then used to his own benefit for quite some time. (Leaving off with the myth story here, but I'm leaving out a huge chunk of what the role in the multiverse Asmodeus plays.)To this end, Good and Evil are fundamental forces in the multiverse, and are tangible things that can be measured to some degree (Detect Evil, Protection from Evil, Smite Evil, etc.). However, this does not tell us, in-game, whether doing something just because it is Good is the right thing to do. You can still explore mercy, judging whether or not it's the right thing to do.My players did not like a Lawful Evil Monk NPC at one point, because he was very brutal, threatened people a lot, and was very violent. But, also, because he detected as Evil, which is a big red flag in their experience. However, they found out that he only attacks particularly violent evil creatures (little "e") -though he'll defend himself brutally from anyone who attacks him- or creatures that protect those evil creatures. After some debate, they didn't attack him, or pursue him later. At two points, they even worked alongside of him. Overall, their PCs had a negative opinion of him, but they thought it would be wrong to attack someone who singled out murderers and dealt with them. And, in-game, killing a particularly violent Evil creature would likely be considered Good, but they felt that it was wrong, overall (though one PC who would eventually become a Paladin was okay with the idea of dispatching the Monk).Later on, Asmodeus filled a similar role, on a much more primal level. The players left off that campaign exploring, essentially, "should we help Evil in this instance? Is that the right thing to do?" Because Good ≠ right thing to do, necessarily. But, none of this engagement with the game (or the long talks with Herades, Therall, etc.) made them "pity" the gods. It just made it clear that Good ≠ right, necessarily, even if it often is. And that was interesting for them to explore.I don't understand this sentiment still. They had a huge place in my game (this is all in my game, now). Paladins are essentially zealots. Some fall for noble reasons, in fact (but most don't). But, by following the code, the essence of Good (the tangible force in the multiverse) imbues them with powers that help them uphold Good. Because, the tangible force of Good is concerned with conquering Evil. That's why; the gods created the force of Good thinking that it was "right", but is it? Well, that's open to debate; bring on the philosophical and moral exploration! It happened often at my table, and Paladins made strong arguments for why Good was right in my game. But, did that mean you can't explore morality? Not at all. It was explored often, in my game, and Paladins had a huge piece in driving it.Again, that was my game, and how I handled it. And, if I ever touch on D&D, alignment will always be there (especially Good and Evil), and Paladins will always have a hand in exploration of real-world moral issues (they're my favorite class, after all...). As always, play what you like <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /></blockquote>

Verification