Lawful Good: Player says they're Lawful Neutral. In attempt to look as boring as possible, they end up look measured and patient like a lawful good character should be.Neutral Good: Player says they're Chaotic Good. In an effort to distinguish themselves from Chaotic Neutral, they play up the good aspect and end up looking wholly good.Chaotic Good: Says they're Neutral Good. In an effort to not look lawful good they act chaotic. Lawful Neutral: Says they're Lawful Good. Acts like a zealous crusader without measured justice in order to lean on the Lawful aspect of LG.True Neutral: Says they're Lawful Neutral and thinks Neutral in LN means standing for nothing but their characters one autistic fixation which is often little to do with any lawful concepts.Chaotic Neutral: Says they're Chaotic Evil but in an attempt to not be TOO disruptive, they end up toning down the evil aspects and act far more neutral.Lawful Evil: Says they're Lawful Neutral. Thinks Lawful Neutral means using systems of law for purely self gain. Neutral Evil: Says they're Chaotic Evil. Acts like a Machiavellian opportunistic master mind rather than acting on impulse.Chaotic Evil: Tale as old as time. Says they're Chaotic Neutral. Acts Chaotic stupid and goes murder hobo.
>>94721858Alignments are retarded as fuck and there is no reason to play any game that uses them in 2020+.
>>94721983FpbpEven if you go old school, you shouldn't use that stupid shit.It can only ever be (maybe) acceptable if you're playing some sort of board game rather than an RPG.
>>94721858Alignment is not a personality but a faction in the cosmic balance.
>>94721983/thread
>>94721858Alignments are only relevant for cosmic beings like Angels, Demons and other planar kin. Applying them to regular mortals is retarded and should see you beaten and flogged.
>>94721983Good thing there aren't any games that use alignment. There never have been.
>>94721983Alignment system is excellent at detecting and weeding out retards at your table, just as OP provided.
>>94721858Nice to see all the new fags trying to earn their /tg/ brownie points by regurgitating something where it doesn't apply. Where in the OP is there there any advocation for the alignment system?
>Acts like a Machiavellian opportunistic master mind rather than acting on impulse.Nothing about that isn't CE>Says they're Chaotic Neutral. Acts Chaotic stupid and goes murder hobo.That's neither CE nor Chaotic Stupid, it's either NE or TN (int<3)
>>94721983First post, best post.That being said, even most DnDetards nowadays still throw alignment straight in the garbage.
>>94723065>Acts like a Machiavellian opportunistic master mind rather than acting on impulse.>Nothing about that isn't CEIt's the weakest conclusion of the chart but I had to write something. It's true though. People who elect to play Chaotic Evil rarely are that distinguishable from NE characters.
>>94723086>People who elect to play Chaotic Evil rarely are that distinguishable from NE characters.And?In part that's because most people don't know what Law is, let alone what Chaos is. But for the greater part it's just because NE and CE are the two alignments for completely functional, sane, and non-retarded characters. Bottom-right (CE, NE, CN (with the CN just being a CE who also performs good acts)) is the most stable party anchor alignment.>It's true thoughIt's not. Part of the syllogism is true, but it doesn't follow that character who presents as CE and is reasonable is actually NE.The problem with "hurr durr act on impulse, be retarded, do lolsorandums" is that it only applies if you have no characterization and don't believe in your character as a person. If you have a consistent set of preferences, you will behave in a consistent way. A trivial example: most (older) demons, including Obyriths, the most chaotic things in the universe since the slaad got stoned and maybe even before then, have a consistent gender that rarely if ever changes (even if that gender is just "genderfluid (I have at-will alter self and intend to make full use of it)"). This is because they does what they likes and they likes what they do.Fucking DEMONS have consistent characterizations, so your chaotic (evil) character should too.
the only people who hate alignments are the retarded and the evilthe same two people who ruin everything in life
What's with all these faggots hating on alignments? Alignments are one of the best things to ever be included in any rpg. If you are role-playing a character of course their morality should be clearly defined. Players are prone to changing their minds constantly and playing like schizos with multiple personality disorder. Alignments help to fix this problem.The real problem is that nobody understands alignment.
>>94728050>Lawful Good and Lawful Neutral>Chaotic Good and Chaotic NeutralThese two are swapped
>>94728050>yet another retard who doesn't realize you can still roleplay even if you abstract the specifics of the character's behaviorAlignment is at best, unnecessary to gameplay, and at worst, detrimental to it.
>>94721858Considering some of the silliness I've seen among my players - fed even myself - in terms of what they say they want to play versus what they end up acting like, this is actually surprisingly accurate to my experience.Though it doesn't quite account for concept drift - free LG character I played ended up being more fun to play as a more energetic, chummy sort who in practice drifted from LG as an inexperienced starting character to almost pure CG after having seen more of the world, met more people, and had their beliefs challenged.But "I'm Chaotic Neutral!" does, in my experience, mean "I'm a dick but the game nominally discourages playing Evil, and now that's everyone's problem. "Have some scrungly wizards. What alignment they are even they probably don't know.
>>94728050>Alignments are one of the best things to ever be included in any rpg.>The real problem is that nobody understands alignment.A system that no one understands and no one gets right sounds like a shit system to me.>If you are role-playing a character of course their morality should be clearly defined. Why. No one goes around defining the morality of real people. They just are the way they are.>Players are prone to changing their minds constantly and playing like schizos with multiple personality disorder.So like real, actual people, you mean? With complex motivations, incongruent believe systems and hypocritical behaviour? Yeah, we sure cant have that. Keep using your training wheels.
>>94730063>With complex motivations, incongruent believe systems and hypocritical behaviour?aka evil
>>94730101if everyone is evil, you dont need an alignment system. Checkmate.
>>94730126not everyone, but at least a solid third of humanityI think most of them don't realize that not everyone is like that
Collaborative RoleplayerNeutral RoleplayerDisruptive RoleplayerCollaborative PassiveTrue PassiveDisruptive PassiveCollaborative VideogamerNeutral VideogamerDisruptive Videogamer
>>94723082The last hold-out are /vrpg/ types who only ever played crpg's and think they are being based and redpilled for using allignments.
>>94730859This is shockingly accurate for my current group's party.
>>94730063>No one goes around defining the morality of real people. They just are the way they are.You are not your character and therefor cant roleplay as them and make decision in a natural way unless you understand what their nature is.>So like real, actual people, you mean? With complex motivations, incongruent believe systems and hypocritical behaviour?No. Not at all. Players do not roleplay like real people. And why would they? It is not their real life and there isn't the same incentive for them to act the way the character would if the character was real. For example killing a person in the game doesn't really matter to a player because its not real and the npc doesn't really exist. You can try to put yourself in that scenario and act the way that you think you would as best you can. But if you're trying to play a character different from yourself then of course you will need to understand what kind of character they are and how they will act differently from you. And this includes morality above all else, duh. I can't believe I have to explain something so obvious.
Alignment Threads of /tg/The only people who seem to have a problem with D&D Alignment are Literal Retards, Philosophy 101 Autists or people who are blatantly evil under the system disliking being called out as vile fuckwits.Every thread on Alignment reveals these three every single time.Literal Retards have issues with the rules and their reading comprehension tends to be shit. They misinterpret simple language and are often pigheadedly obstinate when it comes to correcting their moronic ideas.Phil 101 Autists are worse than Literal Retards. Unable to ignore their newfound knowledge, they argue incessantly about how the system must work within all these ideas they just learned (or have only ever learned) and blatantly ignore the conditions for D&D's Objective Alignment. They only seem capable of arguing about the system as it relates to modern day, real world, Earth and not the Fantasy universe it comes from, a common aliment for certain types of shit speckled, muppet farts ala Caster/Martial disparity.Evil motherfuckers are the worst. Quite simply they will argue at length and with every bad faith argument they have to not be labeled the monstrous things they are. From fascists trying to not have their genocidal movements called out as the evil they are, from people who like to cause others suffering not being properly labeled, to other types who all want to be Good but are so far from it with their beliefs and actions and are unable to reconcile it with the way the system labels them.
Alignment is a truly worthless mechanic. Even most NPCs with a listed alignment don't adhere to it in official materials.Thankfully it's been practically excised from the game at this point, almost no mechanics, spells, or effects of any kind interact with it anymore. It only exists at all as a relic of flavor, even though players barely bother writing it on their sheets these days.
>>94735117>Alignment is a truly worthless mechanicOnly in the 5th Edition and 4th Edition rules context but for all other editions that came before it Alignment was both useful and baked into the gameplay.Alignment offers complexity and nuance to a players choices for his/her character at more sophisticated levels of D&D play which was almost fully dismantled in both 4E and 5E since the latest edition is a basic, training wheels D&D experience for new players of the game.Try explaining to a D&D 5E player how there character should behave after they've been possessed/corrupted by a demon or dark magic without making any reference to evil, or morality in any way. See how that works for you. Reading the opinions about alignment from Anon's who have only played 5E is like reading about someone whining about car engines being stupid cuz they've been on the teacup ride at the local amusement park lots of times...
>>94735260>Try explaining to a D&D 5E player how there character should behave after they've been possessed/corrupted by a demon or dark magic without making any reference to evil, or morality in any wayTheir possessed character should seek to advance the aims of the possessing force rather than their own. For example if they're possessed by a spirit they might attempt to conclude that spirit's unresolved issues in life, while if they're possessed by a devil they might work to increase that devil's power and prestige at the expense of their own.
>>94735278Why would a spirit feel any need to conclude any unresolved issues in life?Why would a devil want to increase its power and prestige?
>>94735117Alignment isn't usually a mechanic any more than the specifically defined goals of a character are a mechanic. It's just information for roleplaying effectively. The rules about alignment only need be brought up if the player is bad at roleplaying their character. >almost no mechanics, spells, or effects of any kind interact with it anymore.What spells and effects that interact with alignment are you referring to? Because that's a whole different topic within itself.
>>94735278>if they're possessed by a devil they might work to increase that devil's power and prestigeSeeking power and prestige isn't something exclusive to evil characters. Also sadism is something that exists, and that desire to harm others is part of what makes devils evil.
>>94735325>why would creatures infamous for doing these things try to do these things?
>>94721858I would think neutral evil would lie and say they are nuetral while chaotic evil would lie and say they are lawful good.
>>94721983i hate everything and my life is like sandpaper scratching against a newborns peen, please rape my face
>>94721983>>94722181roger, we got a negative nelly here. somebody needs a diapy change, over..
>>94735562>It's just information for roleplaying effectively.Depending on the situation, alignment is an impediment to roleplaying. For example if you have a character with a significant motivation, and a scenario where a character's alignment is in contradiction with that motivation, the player is caught between following their alignment or following their motivation. Some people might say this is a staging for drama, but most often it's a setup for confusion, second-guessing, and even argument. For example if a player knows an NPC's alignment, and a DM has that NPC do something in contradiction with their alignment, there's a good chance there will be an argument about whether or not that should have happened.>What spells and effects that interact with alignment are you referring to?Several magic items in 2014 5e were alignment-locked for attunement, most if not all have no such restrictions in 2024. Deck of Many Things Balance card changed from a forced alignment shift to a +2, -2 stat shift. In older editions there were also various items and spells that either allowed you to change your alignment or forcibly changed it.
>>94735681>why would creatures infamous for doing these things try to do these things?That"s right. Why would they? What makes them infamous for doing these things?Now try answering these questions without establishing any descriptors for those REASON's like Good, Evil, Moral, Immoral etc...That's what alignment does. Its a Moral Compass and a framework that represents a important facet of the characters or NPC's overall personality.
>>94735755>That"s right. Why would they? What makes them infamous for doing these things?>Now try answering these questions without establishing any descriptors for those REASON's like Good, Evil, Moral, Immoral etc...Ghosts are often only in the material world because they have unconcluded business from life that prevents them from moving into the afterlife.Devils constantly jockey for advancing status among one another, often through expanding their influence on the prime material plane by forming contracts with mortals.
>>94735714>if you have a character with a significant motivation, and a scenario where a character's alignment is in contradiction with that motivation, the player is caught between following their alignment or following their motivationI don't understand. Why would a character be motivated to do something that goes against their alignment? The alignment is what should be informing the characters motivations, shouldn't it? As for getting rid of spells and magical items that forcibly change alignment, that's probably a good thing. Just because it ruins a players autonomy to choose the type of character they are playing. But it is a common trope in stories for a character to become an evil or good version of themselves. It just isn't usually a permanent change.
>>94735809>Ghosts are often only in the material world because they have unconcluded business from life that prevents them from moving into the afterlife.Why?>Devils constantly jockey for advancing status among one another, often through expanding their influence on the prime material plane by forming contracts with mortals.Why?Apparently you have a problem with establishing and using words that describe the root MOTIVATIONS for why they do the things the do, the REASONS, behinds their actions.All your doing is engaging in word salad bullshit because in your overly simplistic views of people, demons, and spirits, they only do shit with no primary motive other than JUST CUZ. THATS WHAT THEY DO. Alignment is a means to describe a characters CORE motivations which can be refined if necessary.
>>94735809>Devils constantly jockey for advancing status among one another, often through expanding their influence on the prime material plane by forming contracts with mortals.Can't that also be used to describe good aligned Gods as well? Why else would Gods grant their priests powers?
>>94721983Fucking this, having personality traits is far better than some arbritary shit like alignments
>>94734297>immediately gets proved rightlol
>>94735910>arbritaryA character is more than just personality. And personality is more than just a collection of traits.
>>94735848>Why would a character be motivated to do something that goes against their alignment?Very common example - Lawful Good Paladin has an oath to follow the precepts of their god, but they encounter a situation where those precepts contradict with each other, or they encounter circumstances where they cannot simultaneously follow those tenants and what they believe to be good in that situation at the same time.To put it another way, need versus desire is character conflict 101.>>94735856>Why?>Why?Well that depends on the ghost or the devil doesn't it? I can't tell you why every possible character wants what they want. If it's your belief that a ghost or a devil would only ever be driven by evil, that just sounds like you need to read a wider range of fiction.>in your overly simplistic views of people, demons, and spirits, they only do shit with no primary motive other than JUST CUZ. THATS WHAT THEY DO.It's overly simplistic to believe that characters can have individual motivations rather than their actions being dictated by intrinsic morality? You're the one insisting that an Evil character will seek to perpetuate Evil exactly because that's just what they do and exactly what they desire. In your vision of the world, has nobody ever committed evil in pursuit of good?>>94735858Correct.
>>94736005>Ghosts are often only in the material world because they have unconcluded business from life that prevents them from moving into the afterlife.>Devils constantly jockey for advancing status among one another, often through expanding their influence on the prime material plane by forming contracts with mortals.>Well that depends on the ghost or the devil doesn't it?You make assumptions about the behavior of Ghosts and Devils and I'm asking what is the root cause of that behavior is. No, the answer to my questions doesn't involve understanding the motivations of each individual ghost or devil.>If it's your belief that a ghost or a devil would only ever be driven by evil, that just sounds like you need to read a wider range of fiction.No its not. Why don't you demonstrate you have a understanding of D&D Alignment since this is the topic of this thread and don't concern yourself with a wider range of fiction.Your bull shit straw man tactic isn't convincing me you have even the slightest understanding of how Alignment functions in a edition of D&D where roleplaying matters. Basically every edition before 4E.>It's overly simplistic to believe that characters can have individual motivations rather than their actions being dictated by intrinsic moralityNo one said anything about characters having individuals motivations. Characters can have plenty of motivations which are encompassed by and part of what defines their intrinsic morality. That's called Alignment. >In your vision of the world, has nobody ever committed evil in pursuit of good? My vision of the world...You're really pulling out all the straw man nonsense aren't you. Yes they have and it is entirely possible for Good characters to perform evil actions THINKING they are actually doing them for good reasons.Alignment can change for a character as he/she grows. Its not a straightjacket for mortal PC's.
>>94735910every character has both, you dingdong
I like them as a quick heuristic when describing NPCs or when PCs introduce their character. But they quickly break as any grainy moral system.
>>94738046I dont think they're really intended to be delved into in-depthits more of a shorthand "where do you stand" kind of thing, that and a sort of limitation to the available actions of characters
>>94721858For how i see it there are only 3 feasible ways to handle alignment:1. Return to their original implementation (only Law vs Chaos) and use them as "war of power" dichotomy in the game's world, as in "civilisation" vs "unknown", "good" vs "evil", " freedom" vs "control", etc... depending on the specific focus of the game;2. As they are defined in LotFP, having neutrality (unaligned) as the standard and each deviation from that being bordering insanity, for example a C/G character wouldn't simply be an altruistic scoundrel but a fanatic anarchist martyr);3. As all-encompassing campaign moral thematic: during game prep and session 0 the table picks an alignment for defining the shared group general moral standpoint and reference with which designing and roleplaying each individual character.
>>94738253>3. As all-encompassing campaign moral thematic: during game prep and session 0 the table picks an alignment for defining the shared group general moral standpointI really hope you don't think this a recent innovation or something that's not essentially recommended as the default case by every DM facing book since 2nd edition.
>>94738268Absolutely not, at my tables i only allow characters of one step deviation top from the decided shared alignment since ever.
>>94736005>Lawful Good Paladin has an oath to follow the precepts of their god, but they encounter a situation where those precepts contradict with each otherThen the problem is with the paladins particular belief system, that's not a problem with alignment itself. Also I will point out that alignment is somewhat discretionary on purpose. You can sometimes do something that goes against your alignment as long as you have a good reason. The only problem is when a player is constantly going against their alignment because that just means they aren't even roleplaying the type of character they said they were.
>>94738090>I dont think they're really intended to be delved into in-depthI kind of think the opposite. The only problem that I have encountered is players acting totally inconsistent and doing whatever they feel like from moment to moment. Everyone just takes alignment at face value as some kind of cosmetic character feature. No one bothers to take the time to consider what their alignment means and how they should roleplay their alignment. And trying to get rid of alignments altogether only magnifies the problem even more.
>>94736005>correctSo what distinguishes the good aligned gods from devils and demons?
>>94738090Exactly.It's more of a "given what you do and behave, here's your general standing".The way I see it, it's also not a switching state where you are on one and then you are immediately on another. Each axis is kind of a gradient where you pass a point where you cross from one zone, to neutral, to another zone.
>>94739455Alignment is a bad system. Players should be focusing on what their character would do, not if their actions reflect on a chart.
>>94739719>Players should be focusing on what their character would dogee, like what somebody with their alignment would do?
>>94739732No, what THEIR character would do, not what a generic template character would do.
>>94739758gee, if their character is chaotic good, they will probably do some chaotic or good shitand probably not lawful or evil shit
>>94739719What your character does determines their position on the chart, not the other way around.You are genuinely too retarded to understand the difference between a description and a prescription.
>Character is a Drow Cleric of Eilistraee>She used to be a Cleric of Lolth>She joined the Eilistraee clergy because they saved her from an intra-house war where her family was exterminated>She's attracted to the ideals of Eilistraee that are all about redemption and peace, but hates the rival family that wiped out her house and wants to retake a position of power in Drow society>She tries to end hostile situations with as little bloodshed as possible while following the tenants of Eilistraee, but will do so through completely unscrupulous and ruthless means like magical domination and torture as long as it's a preferred outcome>She'll take the time to heal and save a dozen enemies the party has taken down, but if someone slights or betrays her she'll hunt down their entire familyWhat's her alignment?
>>94739872chaotic evilim guessing on the chaotic part cuz lolth and eilistraee, but definitely evil
>>94739872CN by definitionNote that this somehwat implies either>but if someone slights or betrays her she'll hunt down their entire familyis a hypothetical and she wouldn't actually (or her alignment would change), or she'd hunt them down and then do something that's probably not THAT bad.Neutral by balancing good and evil acts. But I only say it leans to the center because I have Word of God that she hasn't lost a CG scholarship.
>>94739928no, torture and killing innocents is automatically evil, as per the books
>>94739965What if they're not innocent or your torturing a demonic entity with holy water?
>>94739967whether or not they're actually innocent doesnt matter if SHE doesnt knowif she has proof they are evil then its fine by me (though I think in the rules its not kosher to kill evil beings just because they're evil; ive always considered that to be wrong and cucked), also killing kids is probably wrong even if they're evil because in D&D people can change and kids hardly know better (irl evil kids are probably psychopaths and cant change)torturing a demon is still torture thoughI could maybe see something like>torture is the only method I have left to get the information I need to save the orphanage from being fire-bombed while the kids are sleepingas being acceptable, but it'll always be highly unlikely that torture is the ONLY option you have; dont fool yourself or play dumbbut I dont think things like these were implied
>>94739967Are you doing for the greater good and is it being done in a judicious way that doesn't go over the line? Many important distinctions exist in any given scenario.
>>94739965She demonstrably either isn't torturing innocents or is getting atonements and sticking to CN because by defintion she's a valid cleric of a CG god, so CG/CN/NG.>>94740024You're somehow wrong on every point>whether or not they're actually innocent doesnt matter if SHE doesnt knowIt doesn't matter at all, torturing people is evil.>though I think in the rules its not kosher to kill evil beings just because they're evil; ive always considered that to be wrong and cuckedThat's because you are wrong and a cuckold>also killing kids is probably wrong even if they're evilThis is true but has nothing to do with them being kids>torturing a demon is still torture thoughIt isn't.>it'll always be highly unlikely that torture is the ONLY option you haveWhether it is or not has nothing to do with whether or not it's evil
>>94721858OP: True Faggot
>>94740164even though you're clearly trolling, you're still retarded
>>94739455I've been following your replies in this thread and I'm glad their is at least one other Veteran DM (I assume) who GETS IT!Whenever I see one of these Alignment threads its like Groundhog Day the movie and I'm forced to endure this thread over and over and over.Thanks for helping me wade through these muppet's who all pretend they hate Alignment and then they can't articulate what it is they hate about it.Or they have no fucking idea how its supposed to work because all they know is D&D 5E so their criticisms are based on their own fucked up beliefs.>And trying to get rid of alignments altogether only magnifies the problem even more.I agree. Whenever you play any roleplaying game where you're trying to add verisimilitude to characters and the fantasy world your playing in you naturally need to incorporate some type of morality spectrum otherwise characters just become bland, video game, action figures.
>>94721858This is why I always play the Lawful Neutral barbarian. I follow my code, and that code is to fight those that would be worthy opponents to me. >>94721983No alignment charts are fine, the actual problem is the players, because typical modern players dont fall onto any of the alignments because almost every fucking modern player wants to be Chaotic meme.You can thank the stupid shit like Critical Roll for popularizing, "Le silly may may dee and dee(z nuts) adventure" where no one actually role players their character, they would just rather do absoulte stupid shit that would go against the group, characters and everything going on in the story or event at that time because. "LOL it would be funny and just like <Insert what ever bullshit happened on your DnD podcast of choice>"Seriously, DnD post like 2018, has been basically me having to baby sit retards each and every session.
>>94741200Yes I am a DM. And I can't imagine trying to run a campaign without alignments. To me that would result in players abandoning roleplaying and just going through the motions like you said. Or everyone playing their character like a chaotic asshole and just doing whatever suits them in the moment. Alignments can seem frustrating at times, but it's also part of what makes the game so interesting.
>>94742450I could easily tell you've done plenty of campaigns as a player or DM with a mature group of fellow players. I've been a "Forever DM" since I was 12 (1983) and for the most part the groups I've run games for over the years have been awesome. Most of the old friends with whom I play D&D with now are all my age.What I've come to realize about the Anon's on this board and their lame opinions about alignment is it's not that they hate the Alignment system its more pathetic than that. They hate CONSEQUENCES.Most of them don't know a fucking thing about how its handled during gameplay or that its just one aspect of the characters overall behavior. And don't get me started on trying to explain the nuances of Personality vs. Alignment to one of these muppet's. Of course you've already tried this yourself in this thread.You might cause them to have a brain aneurysm if you told them its possible to play a Chaotic Evil character who "behaves" kind, caring and easy going but may decide to murder someone just for fun if they can get away with it. That's pretty much the modus operandi of every serial killer in history. On the rare occasion we get a new player interested in joining our group and he or she tells me "Yah, I've played lots D&D....D&D 5th edition..." my response is usually something along the line of "Uh Huh...Well that's great but its time to put your big boy pants on now and play some real D&D..."Apparently according to the most recent woke fest edition of D&D (5.5) Edition Orcs are Mexican now. Fucking retarded.
>>94723142>with the CN just being a CE who also performs good actsBack in my day the DM busted your ass to the alignment your playstyle actually reflected. Complete with permanent loss of a level on shifting.
>>94743421Hey retard, I've been playing longer than you.>Back in my day the DM busted your ass to the alignment your playstyle actually reflected.If you perform both good and evil acts in balance, your alignment is neutral. That is the alignment your playstyle actually reflects. Cope, seethe, cry more, etc.>Complete with permanent loss of a level on shifting.Nice houserule (it's actually gay and retarded).
>>94721858>Chaotic Good...>...end up looking wholly goodchaotic does not mean 'less good' than the other kinds of good. It's the approach to doing good, not the quality or amount of good.
I decided on five for the totally original and groundbreaking fantasy RPG that I’m making.>RighteousYou are altruistic, meek and live to protect and serve others.>GoodYou are kind, respectful and generous when able.>NeutralYou can be selfish at times, but you readily accept and understand selfishness in others.>BadYou are selfish, dishonest and opportunistic.>WickedYou are a cruel, sadistic and manipulative tyrant.
>>94743452>Nice houserule (it's actually gay and retarded).If you are the forever DM from 1983, you are forgiven, since you probably never seriously ran 1e.This rule ensures that players take their alignment seriously and keeps things fresh and dynamic in a mixed alignment party / roster of characters.
>>94721858DnD alignments were born from a simple 3 point scale of default antagonism turned into 3 by 3 grid later on. They have about a dozen issues, mostly related to the inconsistent cosmology and moral rules that depend almost entirely on arguably very specific idea on how the world works, like the dualism of good end evil, where the evil can exist independently from good instead of being its perversion and the existence of the amoral forces that are equal to both good and evil and even provide you with afterlives that can be described as positive, if you are truly aligned with them. Also, it's heavily dependent on all of these moral forces existing in empirical form as both literal directions and effectively substances that you can detect, measure and fake.Just these three stipulations make this a very alien moral system compared to 90% of what irl humans actually believe in, which includes especially the people whining about how removal of the alignment promotes the moral relativism as if the alignment system was directly promoting with concepts such as lawful neutral afterlife. Also, this very system consistently paints the cosmic forces of the capital G Good as allowing their followers to make the alliances with amoral cosmic forces and fight among each other in the name of these forces, which obviously makes forces of good look bad.For the actual working system of the alignments, check Palladium books where you get actual archetypes based on character's values and codes of honour, including the actual moral stances.
>>94744289>actual coherent worldbuilding is too complex, just let me play my gaynigger selfinsert and not pay any attention in any way in which this magical fantasy world differs from my ownTTRPGs might not be for you
>>94744289>Also, it's heavily dependent on all of these moral forces existing in empirical form as both literal directions and effectively substances that you can detect, measure and fake.That's exactly the appeal of the fantasy. Game of Thrones RPG is what you want.
>>94744485>>94744507You hate him because he told you the truth.Also the Game of Thrones RPG is GURPS. Just so you know. It was always GURPS.
>>94744485Learn to read. My point is that about 1/3rd of all posts under the alignment threads are bitching about removing the alignment causing a backslide into moral relativism, while the alignments themselves would be seen as highly morally relativistic in our real world.Anyway, DnD alignments could be casually replaced by the actual alignments to different creeds and deities, with a dash of the evil working on the miasma rules to explain the detection powers, without any meaningful loss to the worldbuilding. You could even keep the order vs chaos theme and make it an actual theme outside the Blood War!
>>94744533but whytheres nothing wrong with the alignment systemit works fine
>>94744533There is literally no reason to remove alignments, they are working as intended.Your only point is that smoothbrains don't understand this, which is true, but you fail to understand that you are one of those smoothbrains.
>>94744245I did not post this reply >>94743452But I'm "the forever DM from 1983" and 1st Edition AD&D is the edition where I learned how to be a DM.I know all about the change of Alignment rules, even back then, but I was too young to be overly concerned with keeping track everyone's alignment infractions.Except in the case of Clerics or Paladin. We used to apply experience point or loss of level penalties on occasion but I had much more fun sicking an ALEAX (Pic related) on their asses if their Clerics or Paladins pissed off their Deities.
>>94743520Anything other than Neutral good is less good. Anything other than Neutral Evil is less evil.Anything other than True Neutral is less Neutral.
>>94736005> but they encounter a situation where those precepts contradict with each other, or they encounter circumstances where they cannot simultaneously follow those tenants and what they believe to be good in that situation at the same time.Sounds like you're not trying hard enough. The mission of each true knight is duty, nay, it's privilege.To dream the impossible dreamTo fight the unbeatable foeTo bear with unbearable sorrowTo run where the brave dare not goTo right the unrightable wrongTo love pure and chaste from afarTo try when your arms are too wearyTo reach the unreachable starThis is my quest, to follow that starNo matter how hopeless, no matter how farTo fight for the right, without question or pauseTo be willing to march into hell for a heavenly causeAnd I know if I only be true to this glorious questThat my heart will lie peaceful and calm when I'm laid to my restAnd the world will be better for thisThat one man, scorned and covered with scars,Still strove with his last ounce of courageTo reach the unreachable star
>>94744632>jobs to luckchaoschads stay winning
>>94744727What?translation please?
>>94744755Reading the statblock explains the statblock
>>94744755modronheaded berk
>>94744555>>94744565It does not work fine. Describe a character and people will have all different interpretations of what their alignment is supposed to be >>94739872. More importantly, 99% of players can't actually tell you what alignment their character will be at character creation because they themselves don't fucking know, that's only something that develops over the course of a game. This happens constantly in writing, where you have a character concept in mind, but as the story develops and that character is met with new situations and interacts with other characters, they shift into something beyond the initial concept.If you were playing at this old retard's table >>94744245 you'd be actively incentivized to never develop or change your character at all throughout the campaign lest you have your fucking levels deleted. Goes to show that autism is eternal.
>>94744786sounds like their alignment shifted over timesomething that explicitly can happen in the rules
>>94744786>you'd be actively incentivized to never develop or change your character at all throughout the campaign lest you have your fucking levels deletedI don't remember anyone who obeyed the Changing Alignment rules in 1st Ed AD&D to the letter. It was usually enforced if players were constantly changing their alignment or running classes that had alignment restrictions baked in as part of their class who were not running their characters in accordance with those restrictions (Clerics and Paladins mostly).The only incentivization a player had in 1st Edition was to make sure you have a backup character ready in case your character gets level drained by a Vampire or other undead, drop dead from a Power Word Kill spell, or get your ass sucked into a void by a Sphere of Annihilation. Trust me you had plenty of opportunities to experiment with different alignments and different characters entirely.The lethality of AD&D was as different from D&D 5E as night and day. Is it even possible for a 5th Edition character to die given all the hand holding and life preserver rules in that game?
>>94721858Personality quiz alignment was a mistake
>>94744289I think Tolkien got it backwards. It’s Good that just mutates and twists, and it’s Evil that teems with fecundity. Evil answers to the basic instinct to feed, kill, consume, multiple, and expand, while good is about taming those instincts for a greater purpose.
>>94745364>mutates and twistsaka creates>feed/kill/consume (thats feeding, idiot)/mutiple (multiply, idiot)/expandtake something, corrupt it for your purposes, go on to do it again
>>94745380Good doesn't create. Good mutates and subdues the basic survival instinct. It subdues these instincts for a greater, grander purpose in exchange of surrendering to a higher purpose. Good is the triumph of civilization over nature. Evil is the baseline. It is the basic instinct to ensure your survival at the expense of everything else.
>>94744786>It does not work fine. Describe a character and people will have all different interpretations of what their alignment is supposed to be>provides example where 100% of responders all give exactly the same alignment for the same characterlmaosick argument retard
>>94745405sounds like creating
>>94744289>Also, it's heavily dependent on all of these moral forces existing in empirical form as both literal directions and effectively substances that you can detect, measure and fake.That's how real life works.
I just realized this entire thread is a debate between law and chaos.Law: (Those who want to keep the alignment rules and adhere to them for the benefit of maintaining order in the game.)Chaos: (Those who want to abolish the rules completely because they hate being restricted by any kind of system whatsoever.)
>>94745475Lol, yeah. This shit is real!
But how does alignment map to the political compass?
>>94745475Yep...No Argument here.And to further expand on your analogyLaw: Those who believe actions have consequences and extreme actions can have extreme and/or severe consequences.Chaos: Alignment? Consequences? Chill man...don't be messing with my self autonomy!
>>94745536the bottom is chaoticthe top is lawfulleft is evilright is goodthats probably the closest you'll get
>>94745536In Pathfinder 1st Edition you will find write ups for notable cities, towns, villages etc...And each will have a alignment assigned to it.It's a generalized or average Alignment for the inhabitants of that city or town or village.It allows a DM to extrapolate the type of politics which would be favored by the people living in that particular place.
>>94745475>>94745544eh, I dunnoI identify as chaotic-ish good-ish and I love the alignment systemI think the people who don't like it are evil and mad about it, or stupid
>>94745536All four are lawful evil as of this writing.
>>94745678Well I'm sure you know that Law and Chaos does allow for a little wiggle room. Just don't stray too far outside your box or the Aleax will git cha !
>>94745752nah, I'm right
>>94745779I guess I should remember to add this :) to my post >>94745752 when I'm just joking.
>>94745475You mean>chaos: those who can read and appreciate alignment rules and aren't afraid to casually break them if it suits their purposes even if it comes at a deteriment to themselves/their character>law: retards too dumb to read who need to submit to central authority at all time, and can't comprehend applying a system to a game of roleplay that's not inline with the rulings of that central authority>>94745678>I think the people who don't like it are evil and mad about it, or stupidShitposting aside, this is spot on the moneyt. CE
>>94745536poorly>bottom leftCG>bottom centerNE>bottom rightNG>leftCN>centerLN>rightTN>top leftNE>topLE>top rightCE
>>94745836No shithead. People in this thread haven't been saying alignment rules should exist to be broken. They have been trying to argue that alignment rules shouldn't exist at all.
>>94745678>neutral good claiming to be chaotic goodIts just like OP said.
>>94745536it can be overlayed 1:1 no problem
>>94745410>100% of responders all give exactly the same alignment for the same characterCE, CN, CG, and NG are all the same alignment?
>>94748837Literally every reply was CE
>>94749056CE - >>94739885CN - >>94739928CG/NG - >>94740164Learn to read.
>>94749196>CN - >>94739928>CG/NG - >>94740164I'm the author of both those posts. It literally says CE and doesn't contradict it onceLearn to read.
>>94749216Neither of those posts say CE though, both are clearly arguing for neutrality or good.>CN by definition>Neutral by balancing good and evil acts. But I only say it leans to the center because I have Word of God that she hasn't lost a CG scholarship.>She demonstrably either isn't torturing innocents or is getting atonements and sticking to CN because by defintion she's a valid cleric of a CG god, so CG/CN/NG.Chaotic Evil isn't suggested anywhere.
>>94749256It literally outright says that it's CE>But I only say it leans to the center because I have Word of God that she hasn't lost a CG scholarship.Not only are you retarded and unable to read, you don't play games.Here's your last >(you)
>>94749271>"The post says she's a cleric of a chaotic good god so I'll assume she skews that direction, which means she isn't significantly evil, which means she's neutral or good"Anon everyone can read the posts and see what they say, and they're not arguing in favor of chaotic evil. Saying you've written posts you clearly didn't write and which clearly don't say what you insist they say is schizoposting.
>>94734297
>>94739455>No one bothers to take the time to consider what their alignment means and how they should roleplay their alignment.But that leads to contradictions if you inspect too closely what any given situation might be solved according to the alignment chart.Even in reality every moral system breaks when looked too closely.However discussing it can be fun if that is your piece of cake.But you can say at first glance that a good character should help people, a chaotic one doesn't care much for rules and customs etc. For such basic characterizations, the alignment chart is fine.
>>94728050Unsurpringly many intuit that good-evil alignments need an objective and absolute arbitrator to decide what's good and what's not, thus a L/E alignment system cannot work in a polytheistic setting.>>94745536Left is satanic, and Right is luciferian, and the fence is owned by the devil.
>>94752821I wasn't talking about that. I'm talking about players who say they are playing lawful and then are constantly causing chaos in the game. Or they say that they are good but they never do anything good. Players will choose to be a paladin and then roleplay them like a chaotic neutral.>For such basic characterizations, the alignment chart is fine.Can you give me an example of the type of character that wouldn't fit neatly onto the chart?
>>94754094>>94756442This is not true. You don't need an arbitrator to determine what is good and what is evil. Things are just inherently good or evil. If the arbitrator said that an evil act was good that wouldn't mean the evil act was good. It would still be evil. Because good and evil are labels for the nature of reality. And someone can give something an accurate label or an inaccurate label, but the reality itself never changes.The arbitrator can't do anything other than interpret the reality which already exists. And so whether or not the all powerful arbitrator exist or not it doesn't make any difference at all. Good will still be good and evil will still be evil.
>>94755499a monk with his own code who disrespects the local laws and customs. chaotic or lawful?a zealous inquisitor who is blind in his way of justice. but he truly wants to serve humanity, sacrifices have to be made. maybe there is an urgent demonic threat. lawful no question. but good, neutral or evil?
>>94754118>cannot work in a polytheistic settingthink of rome. all that serves the glory of rome and its people is lawful good and iupiter smiles.or ancient india. if lord vishnu says a battle is righteous in the eye of the vedic gods, it is lawful good.
>>94721858But what if I'm lawful evil and say it too.
>>94757874so basically the entire world outside of Rome is incapable of Good unless they find some way to prepare their own lands to be conquered by Rome?Or is this a "pick whichever god likes what you're doing" so everyone can be Good kind of deal?
>>94757858>a monk with his own code who disrespects the local laws and customs. chaotic or lawful?Depends on what his code is. Does it make him act in a chaotic way or a Lawful way? A character could follow a code of behavior that says he should disregard all rules and just pursue the good in any form that manifests itself. That would be chaotic good.Or his code could be a strict set of rules that just so happen to contradict the law of the land. If the law says that every 5th day of the week a person must eat fish for breakfast, but the monks religion instead tells him to fast on that day, he is still being lawful by following his own code. He just believes the law of his religion takes precedence over all other laws. If one kind of law replaces another, it is all still law.>a zealous inquisitor who is blind in his way of justice, but truly wants to serve humanity.This one is a little less straight forward. but without getting into all the details I would say that if he truly is trying to do things for the greater good and is under threat from a powerful evil force, then he would definitely be acting good. But this is also the type of extreme situation that could test a characters alignment and cause them to begin acting out of their alignment. If the inquisitor lets the fear of the demonic threat overtake him too much, then he could begin to act out a self interest, rather than for the good of humanity. A good character will look for a way to make his own sacrifice rather than forcing innocent people to make the sacrifice on his behalf. But if he could find no other way and more innocent lives were at risk, then he might be forced to make a tough decision and do something he would never normally do.TLDR: Inquisitor is lawful good
>>94722407>beginner/casual tries to work around a retarded system>it ends with a retarded characterNo shit, not the player's fault.
>>94734297If it creates boring, flat characters when respected then it's a shit system. It's a shit system.
>>94730101>xenophobic elf...That's evil right?>... that fiercely protects what's left of his lands against human invasion>adventure deep into neutral land>see human kid in danger>help him because he doesn't see him as a danger to his race >NOOO YOU CAN'T YOU'RE AN EVIL RACIST YOU MUST ROLEPLAY PROPERLY AND BE A PSYCHOPATH BECAUSE WE WROTE "EVIL" ON YOUR SHEET 30 SESSIONS AGOfuck off
>>94765326You having a spergfit because you can't understand nuance and that people aren't all exemplars of every single trait they might possess has nothing to do with the system being bad (which it isn't), it has to do with you being a disingenuous retard.
>>94765332>every single trait they might possessThere are two possible traits under your great system. If you don't respect these two traits you're called a bad roleplayer and if you do your character is retarded.
>>94765254Most players make no effort to understand alignments and so they don't. Simple as.>>94765277There is plenty of nuances that can exist even within a single alignment. If the character is boring then its still the players fault.>>94765360>There are two possible traits under your great systemNot true. The hell are you guys even talking about?
>>94765332>has a system that categorizes everyone as good, neutral or evil>calls for nuance
>>94765277The Alignment system in the editions of D&D that bothered to develop and explain it properly (Every edition before 4e) isn't capable of making a character interesting or boring on its own.The players have to do that themselves by developing a fun and interesting background for the character, giving their character a personality and not treating them like video game action figures, as well as standing by the moral or even immoral convictions they imagined are suitable for that character.Boring characters are run by boring players. Alignment been tried, tested and is very effective. Its not a shit system you're just a shit player.
>>94765326xenophobic isnt evil, no
>>94757874Collectivized capital punishment and rape of virgins who couldn't otherwise be condemned to death were standard practices, and let's not forget about saturnalia and construction human savrifices.To ancient Romans, the Canaanite-Phoenician sacrifice of newborn to fire was a geographic curiosity, little more.>>94759207For polytheists, gods and goddesses were busybodies you had to get of your backsor could entreat with for bonuses. Otherwise the ancients had very little good to write about them.
>>94767201>savrificessacrifices*>backsorbacks or*Did somebody break spellcheck?
>>94760646I would argue a monk who breaks local customs to adhere to his own code is not lawful, maybe true neutral. Irrespective of the code. If the code says to be chaotic this creates a paradox. It depends on the meaning of lawful.One could argue that sacrificing humans for whatever purpose is never good. Much suffering has been created for the greater good. Maybe lawful neutral would fit for the inquisitor. It depends on what does 'good' mean. So it is not easy.
>>94767201To us now, every historical society was barbaric. No matter if monotheistic, polytheistic or different. But every society had its own definition of lawful good and were full of righteous people.
>>94739965Drow are never innocent, doesn't count because they always deserve to be killed or tortured
>>94767703>I would argue a monk who breaks local customs to adhere to his own code is not lawful, maybe true neutralLike I said It really depends on what exactly the monk believes. But the way that true neutrals are described is that they avoid siding with good or evil and law or chaos. That doesn't describe this monk at all. If the monk is worshipping a lawful god and is obeying the laws of that god, then he is being lawful. Lawful good characters can disagree about what the laws should be but they are still lawful.>If the code says to be chaotic this creates a paradox. Not really. Look at a guy like Diogenes for example. He is an exemplar of what it means to be chaotic good. Yet he still had a philosophy behind it all. You don't have to call it a "code" but there is clearly still a standard of behavior that comes from somewhere.>It depends on the meaning of lawful.Lawful just means you adhere rather strictly to a certain set of laws. Whether the laws come from religion or government it doesn't make any difference, it's still lawful.>One could argue that sacrificing humans for whatever purpose is never goodYes you can argue that, but if you can save thousands by sacrificing a single person then that position isn't really helpful. And there are plenty of people willing to sacrifice themselves if it meant they could save others.The inquisitor is definitely not neutral because that post said he is trying to serve humanity. I assume that means he is trying to do good and help people. He is just being put into a really tough situation without any great options.
>>94721983>>94722233It is the personality/mindset/behavior/ to be ROLE-PLAYED. PC, NPC, and every creature. Those who can't follow alignment definitions are essentially cheats and phonies. Incapable of even honest RP, they are sociopathic in all aspects of life.
>>94721858>self gainEvery player, nearly every intelligent creature. There has never been a true distinction between Good and Neutral. Even paladins and gold dragons always hoard. Good is just too foreign for people to handle just in RP, much less real life.
>>94758294that means you're chaotic evil>>94765388>There is plenty of nuances that can exist even within a single alignment.why limit yourself to 0.01% of possibility with an alignment when you can just have a natural character instead?>>94766657depending on its rationale it's either evil or chaotic; if a character is actively xenophobic just because they dislike others then they're evil (because they are acting in pursuit of deliberately ruining things for others), while if a character is actively xenophobic because they don't want to be involved in the issues of others then they're chaotic (and that's one of the most classic forms of chaos too, just as elves sitting aloof in their forest are chaotic)
>>94770526learn to read, he said "purely self gain", not "self gain in any proportion and context"
>>94770526>Even paladins and gold dragons always hoardBut they wont use underhanded tactics in order to acquire their wealth, they wont steal from innocent people or do anything else which is morally questionable. So there is still a clear distinction between good and neutral.>Even paladins and gold dragons always hoardAt least in older editions paladins are required to donate a portion of their wealth to charity. So its not true that they just hoard treasure. And if you are roleplaying your paladin worth a shit they should do something good with their wealth besides keeping it all.You do have a fair point about gold dragons though. If they are lawful good you would think they would do something with their wealth other than hoarding it. I guess they thought that hoarding treasure was just an innate quality that all dragons should share.
>>94770736>But they wont use underhanded tactics in order to acquire their wealth, they wont steal from innocent people or do anything else which is morally questionable. So there is still a clear distinction between good and neutral.What if the wealth you want to hoard could instead go towards rebuilding the local orphanage?
>>94770625>why limit yourself to 0.01% of possibility with an alignment Its called playing a character. I don't know where this 0.1% thing came from but if your character has any kind of morality at all, then there are things that he will do, and things that he wont do. If you do something evil in one moment and then something good the next, that's not roleplaying. That's just the player doing random shit.
>>94770949actually, i'd say playing an alignment is the opposite of playing a character
>>94770844Did you even read the sentence directly beneath that one? I said a paladin should do something good with his wealth.
>>94770969Ok. so you said that. Do you have an actual point to back it up?
>>94771018if you're bending your actions towards the alignment, then you're not letting the character's personality and history dictate your actions? this isn't rocket science, retard
>>94771034Alignments aren't prescriptive, retardt. nta
>>94771038yes they are, and that's why they're shit
>>94771054You are wronglol
>>94771068no youlmao
>>94771038>alignments aren't prescriptive even when you're deliberately shaping your behavior to fit the alignmentI don't think you know how this works.
>>94771034>bending your actions towards the alignment. alignments aren't a strict list of rules set in stone. They are parts of a morality compass and many character types can exist within them. If your characters does evil stuff they are evil. If your character does good stuff they are good. This isn't brain surgery you mongoloid.>>94771054>Thinks alignments are prescriptive. Alignment can change based on your characters actions. They are descriptive because its based on what your character does not the other way around. But if your character just makes wildly incoherent moral decisions then that's not a character. It's just the player doing random shit.
>>94771118You hopelessly dumb, muppet.For those of us who actually play D&D this the process of CHOOSING the initial fundamentals of character.The player CHOOSES his/her Character RaceThe player CHOOSES his/her Character ClassThe player CHOOSES his/her Character AlignmentIf the player chose the Alignment that he feels is best suited for that character then whenever a situation occurs in the game that requires "Moral choices" the player will easily be able to perform actions that best reflect the Alignment that he CHOSE for the character.That's how it really WORKS. If you are choosing a Alignment and then claiming you are being forced to "play the alignment" and not the character whose Alignment YOU chose then that makes you a fucking moron. >InB4; B-But what if I don't want to be forced to play a Paladin who is restricted to have a Lawful Good Alignment? Then don't create a Paladin to be your Character, idiot.Do Not Attempt to play D&D. Its not for you. You are the Literal Retard I had predicted >>94734297 near the start of this thread.
>>94771756It's unreasonable to insist that a player must fully understand their character by the time they choose alignment upon character creation. At that time they're more than likely to have only a vague concept in mind, which will undoubtedly change throughout the play experience.
>>94771873>It's unreasonable to insist that a player must fully understand their character by the time they choose alignment>At that time they're more than likely to have only a vague concept in mind, which will undoubtedly change throughout the play experienceSo what? This has nothing to do with the points I made. Alignment is not prescriptive. You choose it and perform actions that are within the framework of that Alignment.At no point did I say that your character can't change which includes the characters alignment.I don't even make my players choose a Alignment at all until they've reached 3rd level. If you can't establish any intimate details about your character by 3rd level then you're too busy playing the character like a video game action figure. You've got this prescriptive Alignment bullshit etched into your brain so fucking bad that you think everything is being forced on the player.YOU MUST PLAY THIS ALIGNMENT AS PRESCRIBED. YOU CANNOT GROW. YOU CANNOT CHANGE OBEY OBEY OBEYYour the one talking about prescriptive Alignment so its you who believes characters can't grow or change not me.
>>94772002>Alignment is not prescriptive.Yes. Alignment is instead descriptive. But it's not possible to accurately describe something that has not been defined.>You choose it and perform actions that are within the framework of that Alignment.Establishing guidelines from which to base actions is a prescriptive framework.>I don't even make my players choose a Alignment at all until they've reached 3rd level.In modern campaigns characters often start at third level, or reach it within two or three sessions. In a game which can proceed for several years at a time, that is essentially just as fast as asking for a character to be defined upon creation.
>>94772093>But it's not possible to accurately describe something that has not been defined.Elaborate with examples from the players handbook you are using.>Establishing guidelines from which to base actions is a prescriptive framework.You don't BASE you're characters actions on the characters alignment you simply perform them. Those actions should already be appropriate and within your Alignment if you know what you're doing.>In modern campaignsDon't pretend to know what happens in modern campaigns. All I'm getting from you is that you think characters are born at level 1 and they never had any life before that which would shape their Alignment due to their past experiences.This is a typical response from whiners who can't understand that TTRPG D&D is not a video game. >In a game which can proceed for several years at a timeI've been playing D&D for 40 years now. Your now fooling me with your nonsense. Experienced players have their favorite Alignments they choose for their Characters and have no problems starting at level 1 with their characters Alignment already included on their character sheet. Inexperienced players and people who have no idea what fuck they are talking about, like you, need to do less complaining and ask more questions about things they don't understand with respect to roleplaying.I'm fortunate that in the thousands of D&D game sessions I've run as a DM I haven't had to deal with players who are so fucking ignorant that they would tell me how Alignment works when my players and I have been using it for decades without a single problem worth mentioning.Lets get one thing straight. Its you that has the problem with Alignment and can't wrap your head around it, not me.
>>94772093*they would tell me how Alignment fails
The NasuFate opinion about alignment is that you shouldn't care about the outside perspective of a character, only the character's perception of themselves matters. It is a simplistic approach but it eliminates contradictions entirely. Does a character think they are doing things for the overall greater benefit of the group? Then they are Good, full stop, even if they're a dick.As a DM, that does make things a bit more difficult in a different way of course, because now you need to divine the actual intentions of a character of a player.
>>94767721That's why they needed to be shown the capital T Truth of objective morality. We all fall short.
>>94772093>But it's not possible to accurately describe something that has not been defined.So describe it inaccurately, and change your alignment if it seems it should be different based on what happens ingameNice bait
