Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 8029919" data-attributes="member: 6701124">I'm agreeing with you on that for everything in the real world*. We're not talking about the real world though, we're talking about one where there's a manifest source of Law and manifest source of Chaos. One where &quot;Neutral Good&quot; is labeled true good because the Lawful Good are &quot;crusaders' and &quot;zealots&quot;. It feels like our big difference in the interpretation is how strong the Law and Chaos at the corners are. So, in the examples above where folks gave an alignment and an action, I get why you disagreed. If they reversed it and gave the action and then assigned the closest alignment, did they get those right?*And I'm not buying into Gygax's things in D&amp;D either when I'm running things.&nbsp; I like that Moldvay Basic's one example (iirc) was a Lawful cleric emphatically saving the prisoners.&nbsp;&nbsp; I'd buy the hammer though given the additional justifications provided.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cadence, post: 8029919, member: 6701124"] I'm agreeing with you on that for everything in the real world*. We're not talking about the real world though, we're talking about one where there's a manifest source of Law and manifest source of Chaos. One where "Neutral Good" is labeled true good because the Lawful Good are "crusaders' and "zealots". It feels like our big difference in the interpretation is how strong the Law and Chaos at the corners are. So, in the examples above where folks gave an alignment and an action, I get why you disagreed. If they reversed it and gave the action and then assigned the closest alignment, did they get those right? *And I'm not buying into Gygax's things in D&D either when I'm running things. I like that Moldvay Basic's one example (iirc) was a Lawful cleric emphatically saving the prisoners. I'd buy the hammer though given the additional justifications provided. [/QUOTE]

Verification