Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5427205" data-attributes="member: 42582">My conern with alignment in the (pre-4e) D&amp;D sense is that, in actual play, it turns out not to be based on agreement at the table, but by enforcement by the GM.One cause of the lack of agreement on moral judgement, that in turn leads to needless conflict at the game table, is that whatever we have agreed to roleplay, we can't change the fact that we are modern people, and we are aware of the reality of moral disagreement, and we do in fact have competing interpretations of moral matters.The player of the paladin who believes that throwing the baby out the window is permissible because the lesser of two evils (otherwise, let's say, the baby will die in the corrupting aura of the approaching demon, and the paladin doesn't have the capacity to protect the baby or to remove the baby from the building safely) can't shed that belief just by resolving to play a heroic PC in a morally cleancut gameworld.If you want to play heroic PCs in a morally cleancut gameworld, then the steps that have to be taken are metagame steps, not introduction of alignment rules. For example, players have to promise not to introduce morally challengeing PCs (like necromancers, warlocks or tieflings, to pick some easy examples) and the GM has to promise not to pose any moral dilemmas in play (so no babies trapped in the rooms that are threatened by approaching demons).</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5427205, member: 42582"] My conern with alignment in the (pre-4e) D&D sense is that, [I]in actual play[/I], it turns out not to be based on agreement at the table, but by enforcement by the GM. One cause of the lack of agreement on moral judgement, that in turn leads to needless conflict at the game table, is that [I]whatever we have agreed to roleplay[/I], we can't change the fact that we are modern people, and we are aware of the reality of moral disagreement, and we do in fact have competing interpretations of moral matters. The player of the paladin who believes that throwing the baby out the window is permissible because the lesser of two evils (otherwise, let's say, the baby will die in the corrupting aura of the approaching demon, and the paladin doesn't have the capacity to protect the baby or to remove the baby from the building safely) can't shed that belief [I]just by resolving[/I] to play a heroic PC in a morally cleancut gameworld. If you [I]want[/I] to play heroic PCs in a morally cleancut gameworld, then the steps that have to be taken are metagame steps, not introduction of alignment rules. For example, players have to promise not to introduce morally challengeing PCs (like necromancers, warlocks or tieflings, to pick some easy examples) and the GM has to promise not to pose any moral dilemmas in play (so no babies trapped in the rooms that are threatened by approaching demons). [/QUOTE]

Verification