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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="steeldragons" data-source="post: 5360280" data-attributes="member: 92511">This. Alignment, for me and in groups I've played with (as DM and/or PC), has been a flavor thing.It is a guideline to behavior and belief, sometimes taken into account with personality. For some players it helps very much in structuring "what my character would do right now." Others don't really need to follow it because of their clarity of how their character would act is concerned...they pick the appropriate alignment at character creation and it just remains two letters at the top of their character sheet.I recall more than one occasion when party arguments broke out over a course of action because of differing alignments. This can be good, IMO, creating in-game drama and effecting in-game relations among party members or with NPCs. It wasn't until the argument pours out of the game, among the players, that that can be a problem.That said, I also recall more than one occasion, after watching a player's actions and behavior over a few sessions (or particularly heinous action in one session) having to say to the player, "You what?! What's your alignment?" The answer, invariably was contradictory to the action/behavior and I did/have changed a character's alingment accordingly. When the CG character no longer "detects" as good, that's a fun time...and led to a plot arc of "atoning" to be one of the "good guys" again.My understanding on Alignment was always that it was a guideline to the character's ethics (do you choose/follow law or chaos? Do you lie? Will you cheat? Is violence or torture acceptable? In certain circumstances? For your own benefit? For someone else's benefit?) and morals (do you act for good or evil? Do you act in your own interests? Will you act for others? Do you enjoy/abhor suffering?).Saying everyone is just Lawful/Neutral/Chaotic (in olden days) OR everyone is just Good/Neutral/Evil (like, I hear, it is now) doesn't work for me. It is simpler but not, I think, more accurate. I think the 9 options are adequately diverse to develop various character types with any "3 dimensional" nuance or "character development" you want. A LG or True N or CE guy can be cynical or idealistic and can waver or change or grow. That's not a matter of alignment. I also like them for class restriction. You want the added power/abilities of being a paladin, monk or druid, the divine favors of a certain-aligned deity? You follow those teachings, those disciplines, those philosophies. It makes, to me, common sense. Me too. I still use all 9. As I said, they make sense to me and offer a nice set of guidelines for players to use as stringently or lightly as they need.--SD</blockquote>

Verification