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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="shilsen" data-source="post: 3276675" data-attributes="member: 198">Here we agree.Correction - Does not necessarily mean. It can, but doesn't have to. But, if you're running a LE PC, since keeping the group alive will help the game, it makes sense to run an LE PC for whom being "true blue to allies" matters. What I'm saying is that you can run a LE PC who is able to function with and within the group. You could also run a LE PC who is unable to function with the group, but that's hardly any help in a group-oriented game like D&D. The alignment system lists a few among many possibilities. Also, your idea of careful reading isn't necessarily shared by everyone.The L component in an LE PC can be all about internal instead of external order. Just as the examples of LN PCs include characters who have a personal code. A LE PC could work fine in a non-heirarchical group by relying on his internal code to provide the lawfulness he needs.Many and often. Which I agree with. Just not all and always.And we're back to a broad statement about LE PCs, period. As before, I think you're wrong.I think it's more of an observation on your particular reading of good and evil in the game, just as my opinions are more of an observation on my particular reading of good and evil in the game.In many games, yes. Not in all. Not in mine, for example.Also true in many games.See above.See above.True.Only with more real world, abstract, complex definitions of good, and not with the more concrete definitions of it that exist in the game. And lots of people, working even within those concrete definitions, are able to have abstract, complex good and evil. So I'd say your statements are true for many games, but not all.What would count as Murder and Theft in Champions would not count as Murder and Theft in D&D, so while your point about automatic lethality in D&D is a good one, the comparison between the systems is a little flawed.For a given definition of Good, which D&D doesn't use for the most part.In short, I think you simply happen to be painting with too broad a brush. Not that it matters, since if it works for you and your group, that's all the justification it needs.</blockquote>

Verification