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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Izerath" data-source="post: 1786237" data-attributes="member: 6743">Hey man - just providing clarity in my example, not insult.I certainly didn't mean to sound condesending. Apologies if you took it that way LP. We agree to disagree then.As for your comments above, you assumed I used this interpretation exclusively. In fact, I never state that this is the only interpretation. In fact, I concede that there ARE multiple viewpoints and that for convenience most people pick one as an anchor to simplify the game for everyone.You just proved my point. Chaos vs. Law is micro vs. macro conflict.Morals are a personal code. They relate to one individal's perceptions of themselves and what is right for them. Thus they are micro in nature.I'll repeat this from my previous thread because it is very important. Ethics are structured set of moral codes for a group. They are intrisically macro, because they apply to more than one individual. Ethics are typically based upon the 'majorities' moral code, or in other words, what personal codes of conduct we all believe we should follow. We write laws by classifying behavior into that which is acceptable and that which is not.When our own micro code conflicts with the macro code, what happens?We either break the law (holding to our micro view), or we abide by it (going along with the macro view), depending on which code of conduct we deem as more important. If we break it, it is a chaotic decision, indicating our personal preferences take precedence over society's preferences.I couldn't agree more. I certainly adjudicate alignment this way. For MOST PC's, one act does not make the alignment. I am not saying the fighter in the example is chaotic, but that he merely commited a chaotic act by murdering the offender. For Paladins, this one act may be the exception to this rule based on their requirements. One chaotic act would certainly demand atonement from a Paladin. Again, exception, not rule.Umbra's mention of the Myers-Briggs shows that we try to classify behavior into a structure and that even then, each classification only indicates our preferences. I agree with this interpretation as well. However, when I interpret a PC's action to determine if it is lawful or chaotic, I look at the individual vs. the whole. If it is contrary to the whole, then it is chaotic.For example, if the same fighter went from country to country and continued to murder offenders to his personal code as a habit, then I would say it is his preference to ignore societal laws and thus he would have to change his alignment to chaotic. Ultimately, the law vs. chaos aspect of alignment is a classification of how we fit into society, not the personal moral code we uphold. It is certainly much easier to interpret things this way. I hold to this viewpoint because taking any other approach at the individual level never breeds concensus or consistency, which is critical for fair game play. This entire thread proves that point. No one can ever agree if each of us taints the definition of the "whole" with our own individual beliefs before we try to interpret the definition. It only breeds bias.I wish you luck in continuing to interpret things from a micro level. It will certainly make your life and your game more complex to manage. There is certainly nothing wrong with it, but it is a more complex approach than I think it needs to be.Respectfully,</blockquote>

Verification