Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8049169" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Not trying to make people cranky, but as a writer when I tend to go for "It is something mortal minds cannot comprehend" I feels like a cop-out. I'm just saying "And I don't want to explain it, handwavium"You seem to have meant something with your statement that I didn't get. Because Newton's laws of physics are something we can understand. You proposed something that we cannot possibly understand. And, it can't be explained to us. Because, presumably, the gods and other immortal beings can and do understand it, but cannot express it in terms that we mortals can comprehend. And, it can't be observed. I may not have known Newton's laws of physics, but I could observe their effect. I can drop a leaf and watch the wind carry it until it hits the ground. I can roll a ball and watch what happens. But you can't observe the effect of "good" or "law". We can only tell that the Gods are telling us "this is good, that isn't good" But, from our perspective, both as players of the game watching the DM, or mortals in the world, it seems like the gods are just making up the rules. There is no objective measure that we can see. So, it would appear identical to a world where the various alignments are more subjective philosophies, and the gods make up their own rules about them. And, if they appear functionally identical, and the players and the characters cannot learn what the objective truth is... then why not make it subjective.Especially since then you don't have to have the problem of explaining why two different "Good" dieties/kingdoms ect are squabbling over the right thing to do. There is no objectively right answer, so of course differences in opinion will lead to clashes. I don't need a "well both are objectively right, but you can't understand why and must just accept it" we can treat this exactly like we would in the real-world. As a difference in subjective philosophies.But if he can't possibly know or understand whether he is right or wrong, what does it matter? You (as a mortal mind that cannot comprehend the truth) can't even prove if he was right or wrong. So, maybe he is actually right and you just don't understand.Maybe we should, but I know that what we are dealing with isn't helpful for the people who need the help. You don't need an alignment system. You are still using the rules from 2e that you have adjusted and tailored to fit you for decades. Someone picking up the book today needs help. And instead of trying to define alignment again, since it seems to have never been terribly well defined (and the best defined versions are problematic in a modern context, see "civilization" vs "the wilds" ) it seems better to use a more modern idea of just let people use their ideals, bonds, traits, flaws, and ect.This isn't abandoning anyone. You guys don't need the alignment rules in 5e. Or at least R_Chance doesn't. He has stated quite clearly that he is using the 2e alignment system, and doesn't care about what 5e or any 6e might say. And I think that is the problem with this debate. I'm talking from the perspective of someone who is just using the single page of the 5e PHB and the monster manual. You guys are responding with letters from Gygax and forty years of history of the game. Which is great for you guys, but I don't have those resources. I don't have 40+ years of gaming history where I've solved all the problems I have. I've got a single (barely) page of the PHB and a lot of nonsense that I've been told makes sense if I just stop and think about it long enough. And the value of using that system is.... nothing. Really it is not valuable for me at all. And it hasn't been for any player at my table. Or any player I've might online. Well, except one. There was one guy who was real obsessed with alignment. He was from an evil race, but was neutral, so he hated his own people, but he didn't believe in violence, but he kept doing random crap because he was bored... Oh wait, no, there was another. An oathbreaker paladin who hated the gods and was convinced they were more virtous than the gods, and was merciless, cruel and bullied the DM into having an artifact recognize that they were lawful Good. So, yeah... The only people who cared about alignment, in my expeirence, weren't really the best players. And I'm not even coming close to insinuating that all people who like alignment are like that, but I think it is telling that I've been playing 5e since it came out, and the vast majority of players don't care about alignment. Either they just assume it is there, or they never bother thinking about it, but I've never used it and it has never been something people are like "wait, how will I know if my character follows laws or not?" They just... do it. And heck, at your own table, you've said that you as the DM will tell your players what their alignment is. So, as a player, I don't need to bother with it at your table either. You'll just tell me what you think I am, and as long as I'm not being killed or maimed for it, what do I care what you label me as?</blockquote>

Verification