Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
ShortQuests -- individual adventure modules! An all-new collection of digest-sized D&D adventures designed to plug in to your game.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="ptolemy18" data-source="post: 1949376" data-attributes="member: 24970">You're right, it's true that removing alignment from D&D is a major change and "on my own head be it." I'm definitely not saying "alignment sux" or anything... in fact, I'm pretty happy with how it's handled in 3.0/3.5 for the most part.But I don't like adding it to the DR system. I prefer the idea of high "plus" magic weapons just being "awesomely powerful things which are able to harm almost anything." Regardless of whether they're demons or devils, good or evil, lawful or chaotic, whatever. And I like the idea that higher numbers indicate higher levels of "awesome powerfulness", so that the sword which is magical enough to fight the little demon might not be able to fight the big demon, and so on and so forth. Seems reasonable to me... and less abuse-able than the idea of carrying around a "spice rack" of different swords made of different materials and charged with different alignments. ("Why... a formian? Let me bring out my CHAOS SWORD!... What's that, a Chaos Beast? Let me bring out my LAW HALBERD!... What? A golem? Let me bring out my ADAMANTINE HOOKED HAMMER!") No, I mean I like the +# DR system BECAUSE it's generic. That way, as a DM I can make up whatever house "flavor" I want for the nature of magic weapons.Admittedly, if I were a player who's new to D&D I probably wouldn't think twice about it. The whole "adamantine, cold iron, holy silver" thing doesn't really hurt the game, but it doesn't help it either.Jason</blockquote>

Verification