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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Tequila Sunrise" data-source="post: 4369149" data-attributes="member: 40398">Smite Evil, Holy Word and just about every single aligned attack in 3e. It never bothered me overmuch that neutrals got off scott-free, but it seemed to stick in a lot of people's craw.I'm not seeing any constraints. Alignment is never a done deal, especially in 4e when retraining is core. If a Good cleric doesn't want his healing powers to have less effect on his Unaligned allies, he's free to use core powers rather than mine. My powers aren't meant to replace anything.I think the thing that a lot of gamers get hung up on is the idea that alignments are supposed to be neat little philosophical boxes that any given character can be placed in, and that the alignment system is meant to be a comprehensively precise measure of every possible moral dilemma. They're not.In-game, Good and Evil know the intentions and actions of every individual in the multiverse, and can instantly judge the ramifications of any moral dilemma. But a DM can't, and he/she isn't supposed to because it's just not important to judge the ramifications of every single action that a character takes. Alignment is a composite of a character's actions over time, so if a couple actions are ambiguous it doesn't matter.That must suck for you. In all my years of gaming, I've never once seen an argument about alignment. Disagreements, sure, but the groups I've played with have always defaulted to the DM's opinion.TS</blockquote>

Verification