Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Maxperson" data-source="post: 8331198" data-attributes="member: 23751">No. Never said that.You mean their answers to you?&nbsp; You brought it up, not them.&nbsp; They decided to respond, but it's only you that is making the Appeal to Popularity.You are using the other games not having alignment as proof that D&amp;D shouldn't.&nbsp; That's an Appeal to Authority and a fallacy.Generally, yes.&nbsp; Generally I use bad guys as encounters.&nbsp; I also use the term &quot;monster&quot; the way Gygax did.&nbsp; It equates to encounter.&nbsp; An encounter with NPC humans is a monster encounter.&nbsp; Same as any other race, species, rock, mineral or whatever.Okay.&nbsp; So what. That really has no relevance to this alignment discussion.I'm well aware of what is a fallacy and what isn't.&nbsp; Stop using them and I will stop calling them out.Yeeeeeaahh, (a) is not laziness, and (b) isn't anything that I have ever done.&nbsp; Including in my example of two possible ways a CE creature might respond.If I said races, that was a typo.&nbsp; I meant alignments.And another game.&nbsp; You seem to want to make D&amp;D into one of the other games you know about, so why not just play one of those?Bull!&nbsp; My original response to him was, &quot;Mostly correct, except...&quot; and then I went into another possible reason for the whatevers to go deep into the underdark.Did you fail to see that I said, &quot;I do the same thing, except...&quot; indicating that I was talking about me and how I do things?I personally couldn't care less.&nbsp; This is a game, not real life.&nbsp; What happens or doesn't happen to an imaginary race has no relevance to real world morality.&nbsp; As such, it's neither good, nor bad. It just is.Alignment is a bit different, since it's based on Western morality.&nbsp; Whether it would be a good, neutral or evil act in game depends on how orcs are being run in that campaign.Yes.&nbsp; For an already captured and interrogated orc.&nbsp; Not for the altered example that you gave.&nbsp; You changed the circumstances.It doesn't matter which one I pick.&nbsp; It might be one of those two, it might be another reaction that fits within the CE alignment.&nbsp; And THAT'S precisely what makes it better than your descriptions.&nbsp; A specific alignment has many different actions and reactions that fit within it, so by knowing alignment, I have many different personalities and options at my fingertips.&nbsp; I'm not bound to one much narrower line of &quot;Gets angry if hunt is stopped.&quot;&nbsp; Your line is good as an addition to alignment, but it sucks as a replacement.I answer in order of thoughts and portions of a post, because of my ADD, so I didn't see this until the end.&nbsp; I will not respond to you again.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Maxperson, post: 8331198, member: 23751"] No. Never said that. You mean their answers to you? You brought it up, not them. They decided to respond, but it's only you that is making the Appeal to Popularity. You are using the other games not having alignment as proof that D&D shouldn't. That's an Appeal to Authority and a fallacy. Generally, yes. Generally I use bad guys as encounters. I also use the term "monster" the way Gygax did. It equates to encounter. An encounter with NPC humans is a monster encounter. Same as any other race, species, rock, mineral or whatever. Okay. So what. That really has no relevance to this alignment discussion. I'm well aware of what is a fallacy and what isn't. Stop using them and I will stop calling them out. Yeeeeeaahh, (a) is not laziness, and (b) isn't anything that I have ever done. Including in my example of two possible ways a CE creature might respond. If I said races, that was a typo. I meant alignments. And another game. You seem to want to make D&D into one of the other games you know about, so why not just play one of those? Bull! My original response to him was, "Mostly correct, except..." and then I went into another possible reason for the whatevers to go deep into the underdark. Did you fail to see that I said, "I do the same thing, except..." indicating that I was talking about me and how I do things? I personally couldn't care less. This is a game, not real life. What happens or doesn't happen to an imaginary race has no relevance to real world morality. As such, it's neither good, nor bad. It just is. Alignment is a bit different, since it's based on Western morality. Whether it would be a good, neutral or evil act in game depends on how orcs are being run in that campaign. Yes. For an already captured and interrogated orc. Not for the altered example that you gave. You changed the circumstances. It doesn't matter which one I pick. It might be one of those two, it might be another reaction that fits within the CE alignment. And THAT'S precisely what makes it better than your descriptions. A specific alignment has many different actions and reactions that fit within it, so by knowing alignment, I have many different personalities and options at my fingertips. I'm not bound to one much narrower line of "Gets angry if hunt is stopped." Your line is good as an addition to alignment, but it sucks as a replacement. I answer in order of thoughts and portions of a post, because of my ADD, so I didn't see this until the end. I will not respond to you again. [/QUOTE]

Verification