Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Minigiant" data-source="post: 9626489" data-attributes="member: 63508">I again don't think you are understanding what I am saying.The question was:&quot;3Which edition handled alignment best?&quot;And my answer is that in the most basic common form of D&amp;D that It is designed for, which is dungeon crawling, most alignment do not factor in dungeon crawling because they are too in-depth in outside factors to matter within the basic occupation of dungeon crawling.Only five of the alignments really have a true link to dungeon crawling because only those five alignments have a link to the base intereaction of adventurers, monsters, and non-player characters.The difference between a neutral good hostage and a chaotic good hostage is almost negligible in the dungeon crawl scenario because all you're doing with either hostage is attempting to save them and then maybe attempting to escort them to the place that they want to be which is usually the exit.In a dungeon crawling situation lawful evil and neutral evil are in the most basic sense extremely similar. Only chaotic evil branches out of this element because chaotic evil is too dangerous to let be free do their destructive nature of their alignment and unwillingness to honor agreements.The 9 point alignment system of 3E or 2E might be better once you include the aspects of the game outside of the dungeon crawl. However every table does not put emphasis on parts not attached the dungeon crawl.You see this in action due to TSR, WOTC, and most other 3PPs putting very little effort on NPCs and monsters of those 4 alignments not in 4e and leaving them as mostly background lore.Nobody puts effort into archons or eladrin because no one really cares about the cosmic forces of CG or NG. Eladrin have been downgraded to being fey now.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Minigiant, post: 9626489, member: 63508"] I again don't think you are understanding what I am saying. The question was: "3Which edition handled alignment best?" And my answer is that in the most basic common form of D&D that It is designed for, which is dungeon crawling, most alignment do not factor in dungeon crawling because they are too in-depth in outside factors to matter within the basic occupation of dungeon crawling. Only five of the alignments really have a true link to dungeon crawling because only those five alignments have a link to the base intereaction of adventurers, monsters, and non-player characters. The difference between a neutral good hostage and a chaotic good hostage is almost negligible in the dungeon crawl scenario because all you're doing with either hostage is attempting to save them and then maybe attempting to escort them to the place that they want to be which is usually the exit. In a dungeon crawling situation lawful evil and neutral evil are in the most basic sense extremely similar. Only chaotic evil branches out of this element because chaotic evil is too dangerous to let be free do their destructive nature of their alignment and unwillingness to honor agreements. The 9 point alignment system of 3E or 2E might be better once you include the aspects of the game outside of the dungeon crawl. However every table does not put emphasis on parts not attached the dungeon crawl. You see this in action due to TSR, WOTC, and most other 3PPs putting [B]very little effort[/B] on NPCs and monsters of those 4 alignments not in 4e and leaving them as mostly background lore. Nobody puts effort into archons or eladrin because no one really cares about the cosmic forces of CG or NG. Eladrin have been downgraded to being fey now. [/QUOTE]

Verification