Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8041056" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Missing the point.So many times in this thread people have made the claim that alignment by itself tells them X. Then we can show that alignment by itself doesn't show X.Then we are told that if we look for problems we are missing the fact that alignment works. Because alignment by itself tells them X.You say that I am twisting or nitpicking, when I am not. We took the Mind Flayer example and showed that lawful does not actually show what they said it showed, because it does not apply to other lawful creatures, the Green Dragon and the Beholder. The information they said alignment (by itself) told them could not have come from the alignment by itself, because that information would then be true for other creatures of that alignment and not true for creatures not of that alignment.I've been ignoring alignment for years, but since again, the point of the thread is that they are looking to maybe remove alignment, and people were upset because it was so useful for them and told them so much information, I think it is fair to demonstrate that it does not, in fact, do that.And yes, I know bolding and underlinging don't change an argument. It was meant to show emphasis. Since, this isn't one example, or two examples, bu we are starting to get into the realms of fifteen to twenty examples. And at a certain point, it stops being an oddity or single mistake, and starts becoming a systematic problem.My very first time reading alignment in the books, back in 3.5, I tied myself in knots trying to figure out if my character would be lawful or chaotic. Neutral seemed like a cop-out, especially since true neutral in that edition was presented as potentially just being too indecisive to choose.I did not approach my very first character and very first time reading a DnD rulebook with a closed mind about what alignment meant. I didn't even know it existed until I got to that section. And I was immediately confused trying to navigate it.So, despite you calling me close-minded, and implying I am wearing blinders about this situation, I did give alignment an open-minded assessment when I first encountered it. And found it lacking.Thank you for proving my point. I can't.Without the additional information provided by the spell block I can tell you nothing about this spell except that it is an evocation typed spell.Just as with alignment, you need further information to be able to begin to properly run such a thing.</blockquote>

Verification