D&D General Why do people like Alignment?

[Aldarc]

This is EN World, we dont do figurative.

Perhaps Greyhawk wasn't the best example, then. My exposure to it has always been as a lower-magic somewhat gritty setting, as opposed to FR which is the higher-magic less-gritty one, which is why I put it as a contrast to magic-everywhere Eberron.

Eberron calls itself "wide magic." It takes the conceit that lower level magic is more prevalent in the world while also generally lacking the EPIC magical npcs of settings like Forgotten Realms (e.g., Elminster) or Greyhawk (e.g., Mordenkainen).

 

[haakon1]

This probably should have been a “+” thread.

The OP asked why people LIKE alignment, and at least on the first two pages, most posts were about what people DON’T LIKE about it.

 

[payn]

 

[EzekielRaiden]

In my experience the DM also hosts, almost without exception other than one-offs.

Which is just ignoring the question. Kinda funny to say "hey you ignored the context" in your literally immediately previous post, only to then do that to my own.

If someone wants something that far different from what I'm already running then they can DM it. If I'm invited to play, I'll then accept or decline.

Typical completely useless "advice". Not worth further response.

Hypothetical: a player insists on Eberron as the setting but the DM has no use for the primary elements that make Eberron what it is and instead has put effort into modifying Greyhawk into a quasi-homebrew.

Now what?

One v one? Odd group, considering that means the singular player really is exactly as essential as the GM.

Hypothetical: three out of five players are really really jazzed about Eberron and have specifically made clear numerous times in the past (since you demand that we only consider the tiny slice of the hobby that constitutes a stable 20-year-plus group) that they think Greyhawk is not a particularly good setting. The GM, however, thinks it's the best thing ever written and thus has tried, for (say) the tenth time, to make Greyhawk But Homebrewed So Everyone Should Love It. The other two players aren't opposed, but aren't compelled either.

Now what? Seems to me this is far more like a thing that would actually happen with the GM who adamantly refuses to ever consider the players' interests because "it's my campaign".

 

[Micah Sweet]

Which is just ignoring the question. Kinda funny to say "hey you ignored the context" in your literally immediately previous post, only to then do that to my own.



Typical completely useless "advice". Not worth further response.


One v one? Odd group, considering that means the singular player really is exactly as essential as the GM.

Hypothetical: three out of five players are really really jazzed about Eberron and have specifically made clear numerous times in the past (since you demand that we only consider the tiny slice of the hobby that constitutes a stable 20-year-plus group) that they think Greyhawk is not a particularly good setting. The GM, however, thinks it's the best thing ever written and thus has tried, for (say) the tenth time, to make Greyhawk But Homebrewed So Everyone Should Love It. The other two players aren't opposed, but aren't compelled either.

Now what? Seems to me this is far more like a thing that would actually happen with the GM who adamantly refuses to ever consider the players' interests because "it's my campaign".

How does the GM feel about this Eberron idea some of their players want? Are any of them willing to GM?