Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Helldritch" data-source="post: 8328895" data-attributes="member: 6855114">He literally put bad guys. No lore, no nothing. Again, in D&amp;D language LE. That you agree or not changes nothing. They are generic bad guys. No deep motivations or sentiments were put into their creation. Nothing compared to Darth Vader.Did you watch the Clone Wars? They are anything but children. What we have here is nothing new under the sun. You refute my argument because. Whatever I will bring to show you that alignment works fine for me and hundreds of others will do nothing to take you to accept that my view point is a valid one. I have the same books as you have ( in their 1ed) and comparatively,&nbsp; the amount of monsters in them is lower per page count than what D&amp;D offers. It was often a critic back in the 80s and as I have not bought recent editions, they might have changed the format and might rely on past lore or the familiarity of their audience to fill in the gaps. I fully admit my ignorance on the more recent editions of some of the most popular alignmentless systems out there.&nbsp;WoD was one of.the most popular and yet, assumed a lot foe wise. Much was in the hands of the story tellers and much was hidden in the lore you had to read. And generic bad guys were just that, generic bad guys. At least, D&amp;D and it's two words (letters when you reduce it further for notations) gives us a basic hint how such and such generic bad guys will act depending on those two little words/letters.Edit:&quot; Clarifications needed because auto corrector&quot;...</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Helldritch, post: 8328895, member: 6855114"] He literally put bad guys. No lore, no nothing. Again, in D&D language LE. That you agree or not changes nothing. They are generic bad guys. No deep motivations or sentiments were put into their creation. Nothing compared to Darth Vader. Did you watch the Clone Wars? They are anything but children. What we have here is nothing new under the sun. You refute my argument because. Whatever I will bring to show you that alignment works fine for me and hundreds of others will do nothing to take you to accept that my view point is a valid one. I have the same books as you have ( in their 1ed) and comparatively, the amount of monsters in them is lower per page count than what D&D offers. It was often a critic back in the 80s and as I have not bought recent editions, they might have changed the format and might rely on past lore or the familiarity of their audience to fill in the gaps. I fully admit my ignorance on the more recent editions of some of the most popular alignmentless systems out there. WoD was one of.the most popular and yet, assumed a lot foe wise. Much was in the hands of the story tellers and much was hidden in the lore you had to read. And generic bad guys were just that, generic bad guys. At least, D&D and it's two words (letters when you reduce it further for notations) gives us a basic hint how such and such generic bad guys will act depending on those two little words/letters. Edit:" Clarifications needed because auto corrector"... [/QUOTE]

Verification