Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="pemerton" data-source="post: 5435674" data-attributes="member: 42582">OK, I think I follow now.I don't like alignment too much for this purpose either - my own view is that it's not a very useful shorthand for recording moral views and personaltiy - but that's a different point from the one I made in my OP. And I can certainly cope with it being used this way - my 4e game has this sort of alignment, for example.&nbsp;This makes sense to me also. Especialy in 1st ed AD&amp;D, where I think the code and alignment restriction really is meant to be a balancing disadvantage. But in later editions, where either it's not one (because in 2nd ed &quot;paragon of good&quot; is the assumed default, which a paladin should be able to leverage rather than being hindered by) or because it's not needed (in 3E paladins are hardly overpowered) then I just find it to be an unnecessary mechanical burden with the moral-disagreement time bomb built in for good measure.Which means I think we're at least somewhat on the same page on this, even if there are some subtle points of difference.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="pemerton, post: 5435674, member: 42582"] OK, I think I follow now. I don't like alignment too much for this purpose either - my own view is that it's not a very useful shorthand for recording moral views and personaltiy - but that's a different point from the one I made in my OP. And I can certainly cope with it being used this way - my 4e game has this sort of alignment, for example. This makes sense to me also. Especialy in 1st ed AD&D, where I think the code and alignment restriction really is meant to be a balancing disadvantage. But in later editions, where either it's not one (because in 2nd ed "paragon of good" is the assumed default, which a paladin should be able to leverage rather than being hindered by) or because it's not needed (in 3E paladins are hardly overpowered) then I just find it to be an unnecessary mechanical burden with the moral-disagreement time bomb built in for good measure. Which means I think we're at least somewhat on the same page on this, even if there are some subtle points of difference. [/QUOTE]

Verification