I like your take on alignment, when I played AD&D it was always a contentious issue, arguing whether an action was within alignment or not, something the game does not really need.
For the last few years I have been playing B/X, that only has Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic, but the underlying assumption is that players are always ”good" and …
I like your take on alignment, when I played AD&D it was always a contentious issue, arguing whether an action was within alignment or not, something the game does not really need.
For the last few years I have been playing B/X, that only has Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic, but the underlying assumption is that players are always ”good" and any enemies are opposed to "good", I take this from the literature of OD&D which shows the journey from the 3 point to the 9 point alignment matrix.
Essentially B/X translates to the AD&D alignments of Lawful Good, Neutral Good and Chaotic Good, which are generally perceived as the alignments most DMs would be comfortable with, so it may be easier to just limit the players to those.
I like your take on alignment, when I played AD&D it was always a contentious issue, arguing whether an action was within alignment or not, something the game does not really need.
For the last few years I have been playing B/X, that only has Lawful, Neutral and Chaotic, but the underlying assumption is that players are always ”good" and any enemies are opposed to "good", I take this from the literature of OD&D which shows the journey from the 3 point to the 9 point alignment matrix.
Essentially B/X translates to the AD&D alignments of Lawful Good, Neutral Good and Chaotic Good, which are generally perceived as the alignments most DMs would be comfortable with, so it may be easier to just limit the players to those.
yeah, you are on the same thought train as me.