Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="TerraDave" data-source="post: 5159561" data-attributes="member: 22260">Ya know, there is lots of evidence that people do have "conservative" or "liberal" biases..and can be grouped by something that is not that off from alignment. So, back to the topic. From the dribs and drabs I read and heard from the designers, it was to deal with confusion, and abuse, regarding chaos. LG and CE were almost certainly kept as being too iconic for (A)D&D to take out. A 3 part alignment scheme would probably be too simple for the D&Dverse. And they wanted to move pcs to UA. Alignment is a handy role-playing support. While I have read about all these amazing thespians on the boards...from my own experience simple, stereotypical, guideposts can be quite handy and I have certainly seen players use them effectivelly, which is not the same as slavishly.It can also be an interesting world building tool, which is how is law and chaos were used by Moorcock and Anderson, which is were Gygax got it from. In my homebrew, chaos was disctinct from evil, so in 4E  it became the philosophy of unalignment...which has worked very well. For other game mechanics, aligment is more of a mixed bag, and this is the part of the 4E change I appreciate the most.</blockquote>