Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Chaosmancer" data-source="post: 8049689" data-attributes="member: 6801228">Please follow the actual conversation thread, Sword. Me and Umbran are specifically talking about an Objective Alignment that cannot be understood by mortal minds. Responding that plenty of people can understand it is ignoring the conceit. Also with this response of your.You are stating that the usage of alignment comes not from the rulebooks, but from each individual DM. In which case, the rulebook alignments are pointless, because each DM is making their own version anyways. And yes, DMs homebrew all the time, and I'm sure you can come up with another mechanical rule that DMs homebrew to try and prove that I'm making a wild claim with no basis in fact, but the point is, if you want to talk about how proficiency works, I can tell you the rules in the book, and the specific points where it is clear &quot;beyond this point is DM decision&quot; but the problem with alignment is that even the base rules in the book seem to be up to DM decision, and most of the people with no problem with alignment are basing that opinion off of decades of expeirence and other rule sets, which is not information available to someone who simply has the 5e core books.The problem is Oofta is that not only is your definition of how someone interprets the world far removed from any other example of alignment. Whether or not people believe the universe is ordered or random does not help as a compass for Lawful or Chaotic behavior.Also, it doesn't matter if alignment is a straitjacket or not. The more loose it is and the more people can redefine it, the less useful it is.You've lsited you CN &quot;Square Block&quot; but the problem isn't that we are trying to put the square block in the round hole, it is that the box says the block you have is supposed to be a cylinder. So why is it even square to begin with?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Chaosmancer, post: 8049689, member: 6801228"] Please follow the actual conversation thread, Sword. Me and Umbran are specifically talking about an Objective Alignment that cannot be understood by mortal minds. Responding that plenty of people can understand it is ignoring the conceit. Also with this response of your. You are stating that the usage of alignment comes not from the rulebooks, but from each individual DM. In which case, the rulebook alignments are pointless, because each DM is making their own version anyways. And yes, DMs homebrew all the time, and I'm sure you can come up with another mechanical rule that DMs homebrew to try and prove that I'm making a wild claim with no basis in fact, but the point is, if you want to talk about how proficiency works, I can tell you the rules in the book, and the specific points where it is clear "beyond this point is DM decision" but the problem with alignment is that even the base rules in the book seem to be up to DM decision, and most of the people with no problem with alignment are basing that opinion off of decades of expeirence and other rule sets, which is not information available to someone who simply has the 5e core books. The problem is Oofta is that not only is your definition of how someone interprets the world far removed from any other example of alignment. Whether or not people believe the universe is ordered or random does not help as a compass for Lawful or Chaotic behavior. Also, it doesn't matter if alignment is a straitjacket or not. The more loose it is and the more people can redefine it, the less useful it is. You've lsited you CN "Square Block" but the problem isn't that we are trying to put the square block in the round hole, it is that the box says the block you have is supposed to be a cylinder. So why is it even square to begin with? [/QUOTE]

Verification