Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="GreatLemur" data-source="post: 3464320" data-attributes="member: 28553">Augury is right.Alignment systems, as a general rule, are straight jackets for roleplay, and D&amp;D's in particular is responsible for amazing amounts of completely retarded character behavior.&nbsp; All it adds to the game is a system that allows morality to impact game mechanics, and that's something I could do without.Vancian magic is at the top of the list of things that have always felt wrong about D&amp;D, since I was a kid with a Red Box and a bunch of hand-colored dice.&nbsp; It's an interesting and flavorful variant of a magic system, but as the dominant paradigm of all core-class spellcasting, it really, really needs to go.Classes are the other big reason I favored other RPGs over D&amp;D for most of my gaming history.&nbsp; I'm not interested in recreating traditional fantasy archetypes, or filling specialized roles in hyper-efficient dungeon-delving teams.&nbsp; I want a flexible toolset that I can use to make a wide variety of characters.&nbsp; D&amp;D 3E brought me back with feats, skills, and multiclassing rules that weren't completely insane, but things could still be more flexible.&nbsp; I'm not really asking for fully point-based characters, though.&nbsp; For D&amp;D, I'd say True20's style of generic classes makes the most sense.It's still basically a race-and-class character system.&nbsp; Honestly, D&amp;D is more flexible than World of Darkness, these days.I don't think accuracy to the real world is quite the issue, here.&nbsp; The problem is that the alignment system fails to do the very thing that it's supposed to do: Classify and describe the philosophies and moralities of interesting fictional characters.&nbsp; The very fact that people can't agree on what &quot;Chaotic Neutral&quot; means indicates that the system isn't working.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="GreatLemur, post: 3464320, member: 28553"] Augury is right. Alignment systems, as a general rule, are straight jackets for roleplay, and D&D's in particular is responsible for amazing amounts of completely retarded character behavior. All it adds to the game is a system that allows morality to impact game mechanics, and that's something I could do without. Vancian magic is at [i]the top of the list[/i] of things that have always felt wrong about D&D, since I was a kid with a Red Box and a bunch of hand-colored dice. It's an interesting and flavorful variant of a magic system, but as the dominant paradigm of all core-class spellcasting, it really, really needs to go. Classes are the other big reason I favored other RPGs over D&D for most of my gaming history. I'm not interested in recreating traditional fantasy archetypes, or filling specialized roles in hyper-efficient dungeon-delving teams. I want a flexible toolset that I can use to make a wide variety of characters. D&D 3E brought me back with feats, skills, and multiclassing rules that weren't completely insane, but things could still be more flexible. I'm not really asking for fully point-based characters, though. For D&D, I'd say True20's style of generic classes makes the most sense. It's still basically a race-and-class character system. Honestly, D&D is more flexible than World of Darkness, these days. I don't think accuracy to the real world is quite the issue, here. The problem is that the alignment system fails to do the very thing that it's supposed to do: Classify and describe the philosophies and moralities of interesting fictional characters. The very fact that people can't agree on what "Chaotic Neutral" means indicates that the system isn't working. [/QUOTE]

Verification