Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Lamoni" data-source="post: 2792428" data-attributes="member: 12680">When I first saw this, I quickly voted YES.&nbsp; What a simple question.&nbsp; I like choosing an alignment when I choose what type of character I'll play.&nbsp; &quot;I'll be a chaotic sorcerer who never keeps their promise and is very unpredictable.&quot; or &quot;I'll be a lawful monk who would rather kill an innocent commoner than break his word.&quot;Anyway, then I started reading some posts and I kept being reminded of threads that commonly come up.&nbsp; &quot;Is it evil to coup de grace someone?&quot;&nbsp; &quot;Does a good person have to accept surrender?&quot;&nbsp; All questions that I'd rather not deal with and I am glad I don't have to deal with them in my group.&nbsp; Alignment should be a guide for the players, but if a player wants to coup de grace someone, let them do it without bothering to threaten an alignment change.In conclusion I like the alignment system, but I definately wouldn't be opposed to an alternate idea... or moving it to the same section and importance of deciding your height, hair color, etc.&nbsp; You could reword the alignment restrictions for monk and Paladin. (always keeps their word, follows orders from superiors, never willingly kills the innocent without extenuating circumstances, etc)&nbsp; You could just do away with the alignment restriction on barbarian.&nbsp; Why can't you be lawful and sacrifice defense for offense a few times a day?</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Lamoni, post: 2792428, member: 12680"] When I first saw this, I quickly voted YES. What a simple question. I like choosing an alignment when I choose what type of character I'll play. "I'll be a chaotic sorcerer who never keeps their promise and is very unpredictable." or "I'll be a lawful monk who would rather kill an innocent commoner than break his word." Anyway, then I started reading some posts and I kept being reminded of threads that commonly come up. "Is it evil to coup de grace someone?" "Does a good person have to accept surrender?" All questions that I'd rather not deal with and I am glad I don't have to deal with them in my group. Alignment should be a guide for the players, but if a player wants to coup de grace someone, let them do it without bothering to threaten an alignment change. In conclusion I like the alignment system, but I definately wouldn't be opposed to an alternate idea... or moving it to the same section and importance of deciding your height, hair color, etc. You could reword the alignment restrictions for monk and Paladin. (always keeps their word, follows orders from superiors, never willingly kills the innocent without extenuating circumstances, etc) You could just do away with the alignment restriction on barbarian. Why can't you be lawful and sacrifice defense for offense a few times a day? [/QUOTE]

Verification