Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Aberzanzorax" data-source="post: 5424961" data-attributes="member: 64209">I've read this and the former thread with interest (and was apparently quoted in the op of this thread).&nbsp;&nbsp;One thing I have to say regarding both is that there are &quot;alignments&quot; and then there are &quot;ALIGNMENTS!!!!&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp;In the original thread in question, three players stand out as having the latter. Two characters are made with the Book of Exalted Deeds. One is a paladin/monk. These are characters with &quot;ALIGNMENTS!!!!&quot; in my opinion.&nbsp;&nbsp;Choosing to play one of these classes is making a choice that, on some level, alignment is central and powerful in the character's concept. It is THE (not one of the, but THE) driving force for the character. These are saintly folks. Every action they take should first be considered through the lens of alignment (rather than monetary/power gain, will they die attempting it, etc).&nbsp;&nbsp;I agree, overall alignment does not dictate a character's behavior...and indeed there is a lot of room for a variety of decisions. However, when the player himself makes a character whose purpose for existing is to do Good and combat Evil, then there's not room for &quot;hey, that guy's suspicious, let's knock him down and take his stuff, then run away with it.&quot;&nbsp;&nbsp;As always with morality, only rarely are there very clear wrongs and very clear rights...most of the decisions are on a large continuum of gray. The average character has the luxury of being wherever they are comfortable in that continuum, with some minor effort toward their alignment goals. An exalted character or paladin must always be thinking...maybe it's gray, but can it be even slightly closer to good...even if that's 10 times as hard?&nbsp;&nbsp;Final thought: If you want to play a paragon of good, it's going to limit your moral options. Simple as that.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Aberzanzorax, post: 5424961, member: 64209"] I've read this and the former thread with interest (and was apparently quoted in the op of this thread). One thing I have to say regarding both is that there are "alignments" and then there are "ALIGNMENTS!!!!" In the original thread in question, three players stand out as having the latter. Two characters are made with the Book of Exalted Deeds. One is a paladin/monk. These are characters with "ALIGNMENTS!!!!" in my opinion. Choosing to play one of these classes is making a choice that, on some level, alignment is central and powerful in the character's concept. It is THE (not one of the, but THE) driving force for the character. These are saintly folks. Every action they take should first be considered through the lens of alignment (rather than monetary/power gain, will they die attempting it, etc). I agree, overall alignment does not dictate a character's behavior...and indeed there is a lot of room for a variety of decisions. However, when the player himself makes a character whose purpose for existing is to do Good and combat Evil, then there's not room for "hey, that guy's suspicious, let's knock him down and take his stuff, then run away with it." As always with morality, only rarely are there very clear wrongs and very clear rights...most of the decisions are on a large continuum of gray. The average character has the luxury of being wherever they are comfortable in that continuum, with some minor effort toward their alignment goals. An exalted character or paladin must always be thinking...maybe it's gray, but can it be even slightly closer to good...even if that's 10 times as hard? Final thought: If you want to play a paragon of good, it's going to limit your moral options. Simple as that. [/QUOTE]

Verification