Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Jasperak" data-source="post: 4657441" data-attributes="member: 2487">There are so many ways that I want to answer this post that I think it may take me multiple posts. The most important point I think I can make is this. Unless the DM or campaign designer has the dramatic construction talents of Shakespeare, any attempt to create serious reflection will fall far short of inducing thought-provoking questions on evil and morality. My 20+ years of experience with all sorts of players tells me this. A DM that has never see a person die, unlocked a house only to find the former occupant decaying on the couch, or ever pointed a loaded weapon at some else in anger or defense cannot seriously set up a situation that would induce thought-provoking emotions before a laugh from me.With 4e you have tried to make the game easier and more fun to play. That was one of the design goals right? So you want to take EVIL out of the equation in an effort to provoke an &quot;ah-ha&quot; moment of reflection. In my experience that only forces the dice to rest on the table while a player argues with the DM about why he shouldn't lose his paladin status for killing an orc baby.The more I think about it, the more I think that the holiest of sacred cows in D&amp;D is its Heroic Fantasy base. It is not Warhammer Fantasy, It is not Paranoia. Your moral relativism would have us question if Tharizdun cultists are just misguided and need to be reeducated. A Lawful Good paladin cannot go into a Tharizdun temple and start slaughtering cultists just because that's the adventure the DM comes up with, just like he cannot go killing orc babies.I understand that others enjoy the character development that occurs when characters and their players are presented with difficult moral questions. Thats cool for them, but not for me. Moral questions generally get in the way of XP and beer.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Jasperak, post: 4657441, member: 2487"] There are so many ways that I want to answer this post that I think it may take me multiple posts. The most important point I think I can make is this. Unless the DM or campaign designer has the dramatic construction talents of Shakespeare, any attempt to create serious reflection will fall far short of inducing thought-provoking questions on evil and morality. My 20+ years of experience with all sorts of players tells me this. A DM that has never see a person die, unlocked a house only to find the former occupant decaying on the couch, or ever pointed a loaded weapon at some else in anger or defense cannot seriously set up a situation that would induce thought-provoking emotions before a laugh from me. With 4e you have tried to make the game easier and more fun to play. That was one of the design goals right? So you want to take EVIL out of the equation in an effort to provoke an "ah-ha" moment of reflection. In my experience that only forces the dice to rest on the table while a player argues with the DM about why he shouldn't lose his paladin status for killing an orc baby. The more I think about it, the more I think that the holiest of sacred cows in D&D is its Heroic Fantasy base. It is not Warhammer Fantasy, It is not Paranoia. Your moral relativism would have us question if Tharizdun cultists are just misguided and need to be reeducated. A Lawful Good paladin cannot go into a Tharizdun temple and start slaughtering cultists just because that's the adventure the DM comes up with, just like he cannot go killing orc babies. I understand that others enjoy the character development that occurs when characters and their players are presented with difficult moral questions. Thats cool for them, but not for me. Moral questions generally get in the way of XP and beer. [/QUOTE]

Verification