Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="John Morrow" data-source="post: 2165540" data-attributes="member: 27012">To be fair, it sounds like the flashpoint came when the players said that they'd do the same thing in real life.  He felt they were being reprehensible because they had crossed the line into the real world, too.To quote the Rolling Stones, "You can't always get what you want but, if you try, sometimes you might find you get what you need."  I'm looking for functional, not perfect.I think that alignment serves a purpose in the game and I also think it can function as a primative but useful set of personality mechanics.  That's why I'd rather not drop them.Actually, I disagree.  First, the nine country theory supposed that none of those countries would care about what goes on in the other nine countries and that it would be trivially easy for each country to maintain a population of only one alignment.  I don't really think alignment makes things all that simple.Second, I think something like the Crusades can happen in D&D, though perhaps not in the way a moral relativist might interpret the Crusades.  And of course nothing in the D&D alignment system excludes infighting between people of the same alignment.In the case of Paladins, it would really help if they existed, in the RAW, for all nine alignments rather than just one.  Call them "Exemplars" or whatever, but a player should be able to play a Holy Warrior that is Neutral Good or Lawful Neutral or whatever.</blockquote>

Verification