>playing games with alignment I really hope you faggots

>>51006536
Well, I'm not going to be the idiot who plays a game where the rulebook has poorly aligned text formating.

>>51006613
>Not caring for Mother Earth and using as much of the page as possible

>>51006671
>Not buying the PDF copy to avoid paper use altogether.
Get on my level.

>>51006613
Haha what a jokezter, you are a RIOT!

>>51006696
>Not accessing the akashic records of the rules via astral projection
Bow before an ascended master

>>51006613
Good start to a horrible thread subject, anon.

>>51006863
How is the text aligned though in the akashic records?

>>51006927
Have you ever seen the Star Wars intro crawl?

>>51006696
Alright, real talk though? Why does every single rulebook pdf insist on using two-column formatting? It's absolute hell on the formatting to copy and paste excerpts in rules discussions. They could at least release an ebook format so you could have that and be able to read it more easily on mobile.

>>51006954
At that angle it would be horrible.

>>51006536
why? i won't be inviting you to any of my games anyway.

In OD&D, the cosmology was such that the forces of Law and Chaos were eternally at war. The only alignments were lawful, neutral, and chaotic, and they referred to whether you were aligned with one of the two sides in the war.

Thus, most humans were neutral because they had no direct stake in the war.

It meant nothing more or less than this.

Please explain to me what's wrong with this?

>>51006536
>playing games
You DO know 4chan is 18+, right?

This thread is a mess.
Every single post.

>>51010820
What's wrong with

>>51006613
and
>>51008821

>>51008678

>Implying you have any games

>>51008821
What's wrong with it is in later editions, these terms were taken to another extreme, listed as a moral compass for your actions instead of a simple go to for your allies in a larger conflict than yourself. As such, classes who were expected to adhere to stricter moral codes were shafted if the DM thought the players did anything to conflict with their alignment, possibly robbing them of class features; ie, the fallen Paladin and other such classes.

As a simple direction of which side of the cosmic spectrum you lied on, nothing was wrong with it. Later editions just turned that on its head and armed shitty DMs with a new toy to fuck players over for no reason. It's not that alignment in OD&D sucks, it that those who favored later editions of D&D (for one reason or another) have been turned off of alignments due to how they worked as a heavily involved mechanical element that many DMs and players latched onto without fully understanding how to use them.

>>51013071
I agree pretty much entirely. I tend to run Swords & Wizardry Complete and use the one-axis alignment from 0e.

But OP was shitting on alignments in general so I thought I'd ask him/her to explain what's wrong with it there.

>>51013176
Sadly, most hate on alignments stems from those editions. In some cases, it might be a specific edition that's the target of the hate. In more extreme cases, it's more or less a blanket idea that alignment in all games (possibly even outside of D&D) is a misunderstood mess of bullshit waiting to happen. So while I don't mean to defend OP, I'm pretty sure the mindset he has comes from a time when alignments were truly terrible to include.

>>51013071
>in later editions
Alignment has only ever been a problem in 3.5 for me. In AD&D it was a bigger part of the mechanics and everything was weirder and bad rules were because they tried something that didn't work for everyone.

3.5 has no excuse for the alignment abuses it encouraged, but since it doesn't crack the top 50 of issues with the rules it's not talked about as much. Most people just ignored that shit and threw shade on Paladins.

>>51006536
I'll keep in mind next time I play Pathfinder that some assburger on the Internet disapproves.

>>51006536
I do, but it's certainly not gospel for your character's choices, we just use it as a general frame to work from.
It also doesn't quite work the way you may think, at least for me. "Evil" means you're sadistic, very self-serving, etc., while "Good" means that you are charitable, empathetic, etc. Lawful and Chaotic is really just if you're pro or anti-establishment.

>>51013981
You better.