Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Cadence" data-source="post: 8329133" data-attributes="member: 6701124">Further down the forum page where he had that quote,&nbsp; didn't he also note that the NG and CG characters wouldn't do so? Iirc correctly, he also responded positively to a posting DM who just avoided ever putting the players in that situation.In AD&amp;D it feels like he wanted to be able to easily set the game in various pseudo-historical settings, where the leaders and societies would act roughly like one might extrapolate from their real world analogs.&nbsp; And so, if he simultaneously wanted to use alignment, wanted leaders and societies to act &quot;realistically&quot;, and didn't want almost all of the leaders and societies to be labeled as evil (since many/most/nearly all of the real world ones engaged in some combination of slavery, genocide, pillaging etc...), was using &quot;morality of their time&quot; the easy thing to go with? Would this have also been an easy thing to go with since people generally don't like to view their own ancestors (familial, societal, or religious) as evil if they can avoid it?With the benefit of hindsight and being from the subsequent generations, it feels like either giving up having the good guys do things we now view as evil or giving up alignment would have been easier and better solutions.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Cadence, post: 8329133, member: 6701124"] Further down the forum page where he had that quote, didn't he also note that the NG and CG characters wouldn't do so? Iirc correctly, he also responded positively to a posting DM who just avoided ever putting the players in that situation. In AD&D it feels like he wanted to be able to easily set the game in various pseudo-historical settings, where the leaders and societies would act roughly like one might extrapolate from their real world analogs. And so, if he simultaneously wanted to use alignment, wanted leaders and societies to act "realistically", and didn't want almost all of the leaders and societies to be labeled as evil (since many/most/nearly all of the real world ones engaged in some combination of slavery, genocide, pillaging etc...), was using "morality of their time" the easy thing to go with? Would this have also been an easy thing to go with since people generally don't like to view their own ancestors (familial, societal, or religious) as evil if they can avoid it? With the benefit of hindsight and being from the subsequent generations, it feels like either giving up having the good guys do things we now view as evil or giving up alignment would have been easier and better solutions. [/QUOTE]

Verification