Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Plane Sailing" data-source="post: 579493" data-attributes="member: 114">Perhaps the really funny thing is that WotC decided to hard-wire in good and evil as non-subjective truths. If you check up the PHB and DMG you will find that they are defined as basically non-subjective, objective realities.IMO that tends to cause more problems than it solves in the long run! I'd be happy to see alignment ditched and forgotten for ever, replaced by the kind of thing that Runequest had in its cults. The d20 Modern "allegiance" system is a fair first step, but it falters in the one truly significant area - defining (or helping DMs to define) the inter-relationships between different allegiances.Back in RQ, your cult affiliation gave you a good idea of who were your allies, your friends, neutral, your enemies or those you would kill outright at any opportunity... and this could vary for different members of the same party. It was a great system and could be used as a basis for producing similar things for the gods in a D&D Pantheon, the nations in D&D Kingdoms and such like.The one area in D&D where absolute alignment is significant is those spells which have differing effects depending upon the target alignment. For all the divine ones I'd be tempted to make the distinction "worships my god/doesn't worship my god".Sorry for the sidetrack Arcady...</blockquote>