Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="rounser" data-source="post: 2659357" data-attributes="member: 1106">Wow, taking stuff for granted much are we???Like a class, an alignment tells you with a single word masses of information that are directly relevant to how you should play that character.&nbsp; It's not sophisticated, but rather it's shorthand, so people take it for granted and think they're above it, ignorant of the large amount of work it's doing for them and the space it's saving.Take away &quot;evil&quot; from &quot;evil wizard&quot;, and you've lost a lot of information.&nbsp; Now do that to the entire monster manual.&nbsp; Ditching alignment is suddenly not such a hot idea....in fact, it's outright dumb.And it does have a mechanical purpose; it tells you who suffers from Protection from Good.The way it's implemented is another matter (e.g. the straightjacket approach), but again, the concept should not necessarily be dropped because the implementation is shoddy.Given that whenever a convenience like this or the class-based system comes up and everyone wants to ditch it, or the implied setting as a whole, ignorant of the huge amount of work it's doing for everyone, I'm rather glad that you guys aren't designing 4E!Quite frankly?&nbsp; Sheesh Merric, maybe we should do away with monster names too, there's no mechanical reason for them either!&nbsp; None of these mechanically irrelevant tags like &quot;goblin&quot; or &quot;red dragon&quot;, we'll call them all &quot;Monster&quot; and be done with it...&nbsp; <img src="http://www.enworld.org/forum/images/smilies/laugh.png"&nbsp; class="smilie" loading="lazy" alt=":lol:" title="Laughing&nbsp; &nbsp; :lol:" data-shortname=":lol:" /></blockquote>

[QUOTE="rounser, post: 2659357, member: 1106"] Wow, taking stuff for granted much are we??? Like a class, an alignment tells you with a single word masses of information that are directly relevant to how you should play that character. It's not sophisticated, but rather it's shorthand, so people take it for granted and think they're above it, ignorant of the large amount of work it's doing for them and the space it's saving. Take away "evil" from "evil wizard", and you've lost a lot of information. Now do that to the entire monster manual. Ditching alignment is suddenly not such a hot idea....in fact, it's outright dumb. And it does have a mechanical purpose; it tells you who suffers from [i]Protection from Good[/i]. The way it's implemented is another matter (e.g. the straightjacket approach), but again, the concept should not necessarily be dropped because the implementation is shoddy. Given that whenever a convenience like this or the class-based system comes up and everyone wants to ditch it, or the implied setting as a whole, ignorant of the huge amount of work it's doing for everyone, I'm rather glad that you guys aren't designing 4E! Quite frankly? Sheesh Merric, maybe we should do away with monster names too, there's no mechanical reason for them either! None of these mechanically irrelevant tags like "goblin" or "red dragon", we'll call them all "Monster" and be done with it... :lol: [/QUOTE]

Verification