Quote from: Mistwell on May 26, 2021, 02:07:27 PM

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 25, 2021, 11:00:30 AM
Ravenloft has removed alignment from #dnd5e and Drow are now Good. This is all a Postmodernist plan to move #dnd away from myth and moral absolutes of heroic fantasy into "OMG So Random" soulless play.
#ttrpg #osr

So, in case anyone was still thinking RPGPundit was posting accurate information about D&D:

1) Ravenloft doesn't ban alignment.
2) Ravenloft doesn't make Drow good.
3) The RPGPundit hasn't even read the book he's talking about.

of course not, this is about truth not facts, he's foretelling how bad things are going to get and how the last bastion of, uh, classical epic morals is falling before dread modernity

Quote from: Ghostmaker on May 26, 2021, 11:37:40 AM
Sigh. Here we go again.

One more time: the reason alignment is considered such an integral part of D&D is because in most of the settings, concepts like good, evil, law, and chaos aren't just philosophical ideas, but tangible forces which for better or worse have an effect on the world, as much as gravity or magic.

Now, the Darklords of the various Ravenloft domains do often have an element of tragedy to them, but not in the sense of 'this bad thing happened to them and they didn't deserve it', but rather 'they made one bad decision after another and are now the villain in their narrative, and half the time they don't even see it'. Which doesn't mean your wandering murderhobos shouldn't knock them over and take their stuff, just that their descent into evil had (or it SHOULD have had) a starting point where they went off the moral rails.

The problem, in my opinion, is that wokeists are distinctly uncomfortable with the idea of objective moral codes, even in fictional settings. The idea of such makes them uneasy (guilty consciences, perhaps?) and thus they try to scrub such references.

Plus like the barbarians they are, they like taking scalps. And damage to D&D is one of the biggest scalps one can claim.

Quote from: jhkim on May 26, 2021, 01:06:12 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on May 26, 2021, 11:37:40 AM
One more time: the reason alignment is considered such an integral part of D&D is because in most of the settings, concepts like good, evil, law, and chaos aren't just philosophical ideas, but tangible forces which for better or worse have an effect on the world, as much as gravity or magic.

Now, the Darklords of the various Ravenloft domains do often have an element of tragedy to them, but not in the sense of 'this bad thing happened to them and they didn't deserve it', but rather 'they made one bad decision after another and are now the villain in their narrative, and half the time they don't even see it'. Which doesn't mean your wandering murderhobos shouldn't knock them over and take their stuff, just that their descent into evil had (or it SHOULD have had) a starting point where they went off the moral rails.

The problem, in my opinion, is that wokeists are distinctly uncomfortable with the idea of objective moral codes, even in fictional settings. The idea of such makes them uneasy (guilty consciences, perhaps?) and thus they try to scrub such references.

You're implying lack of alignment is somehow a "wokist" thing, but I still say that it's not. Lacking alignment isn't necessarily lacking objective moral codes, as is shown by the hundreds of RPGs since the 1970s that lack alignment. Again, virtually all RPGs other than D&D and its direct imitators lack alignment, including explicitly gothic RPGs like Chill, for example.

When I ran a gothic horror campaign in the late 1980s, I didn't use alignment - not because there weren't objective morals, but because they weren't put in boxes. When we played, what we discussed was things like "There is a darkness in his soul, but he may yet cling to hope through his love for his daughter" and not "Is he Lawful Neutral or Lawful Evil?" Even when I used D&D to run the Ravenloft modules, I ignored alignment as I usually do in D&D, and instead talked in non-alignment terms.

One of the big deals is whether to label an entire person into a box, rather than individual acts. In my gothic horror game, characters would act "out of alignment" all the time - in that they might commit both good acts and evil acts side by side. For example, Doctor Nelson was obsessed with his father's ghost and would disregard ethics in pursuit of his obsession, but when not caught up in that, he was a voice of compassion for the family. I have no idea what I would set his alignment as.

While it's possible to deal with such ambiguity even when using an alignment system, I think the alignment system doesn't *help* to do this. In practice, I don't see the functional benefit compared to just not having alignment.

Not necessarily. I don't think of games lacking alignment as 'wokeist'. However, I do view the relentless need to retcon away the concepts of good and evil as very wokeist, especially in a game system where, again, such concepts are tangible forces in the universe. And I think it's going to have a lot of collateral damage.

For example: where do bodaks come from? They are hapless mortals exposed to levels of evil such that it destroys and remakes them into undead abominations.

Quote from: RPGPundit on May 25, 2021, 11:00:30 AM
Ravenloft has removed alignment from #dnd5e and Drow are now Good.

If there is no Alignment then how can Drow be Good?

If Drow are Good then how can there be no Alignment?

Quote from: Ghostmaker on May 26, 2021, 07:25:02 PM

Quote from: jhkim on May 26, 2021, 01:06:12 PM

Quote from: Ghostmaker on May 26, 2021, 11:37:40 AM
One more time: the reason alignment is considered such an integral part of D&D is because in most of the settings, concepts like good, evil, law, and chaos aren't just philosophical ideas, but tangible forces which for better or worse have an effect on the world, as much as gravity or magic.

Now, the Darklords of the various Ravenloft domains do often have an element of tragedy to them, but not in the sense of 'this bad thing happened to them and they didn't deserve it', but rather 'they made one bad decision after another and are now the villain in their narrative, and half the time they don't even see it'. Which doesn't mean your wandering murderhobos shouldn't knock them over and take their stuff, just that their descent into evil had (or it SHOULD have had) a starting point where they went off the moral rails.

The problem, in my opinion, is that wokeists are distinctly uncomfortable with the idea of objective moral codes, even in fictional settings. The idea of such makes them uneasy (guilty consciences, perhaps?) and thus they try to scrub such references.

You're implying lack of alignment is somehow a "wokist" thing, but I still say that it's not. Lacking alignment isn't necessarily lacking objective moral codes, as is shown by the hundreds of RPGs since the 1970s that lack alignment. Again, virtually all RPGs other than D&D and its direct imitators lack alignment, including explicitly gothic RPGs like Chill, for example.

When I ran a gothic horror campaign in the late 1980s, I didn't use alignment - not because there weren't objective morals, but because they weren't put in boxes. When we played, what we discussed was things like "There is a darkness in his soul, but he may yet cling to hope through his love for his daughter" and not "Is he Lawful Neutral or Lawful Evil?" Even when I used D&D to run the Ravenloft modules, I ignored alignment as I usually do in D&D, and instead talked in non-alignment terms.

One of the big deals is whether to label an entire person into a box, rather than individual acts. In my gothic horror game, characters would act "out of alignment" all the time - in that they might commit both good acts and evil acts side by side. For example, Doctor Nelson was obsessed with his father's ghost and would disregard ethics in pursuit of his obsession, but when not caught up in that, he was a voice of compassion for the family. I have no idea what I would set his alignment as.

While it's possible to deal with such ambiguity even when using an alignment system, I think the alignment system doesn't *help* to do this. In practice, I don't see the functional benefit compared to just not having alignment.

Not necessarily. I don't think of games lacking alignment as 'wokeist'. However, I do view the relentless need to retcon away the concepts of good and evil as very wokeist, especially in a game system where, again, such concepts are tangible forces in the universe. And I think it's going to have a lot of collateral damage.

For example: where do bodaks come from? They are hapless mortals exposed to levels of evil such that it destroys and remakes them into undead abominations.

radiation now, which is what it sounds like you're describing, so maybe the problem is giving evil weird quasi-scientific qualities.

Speaking of Alignment, a recent Jordan Peterson quote struck me:

"Life is a battle of Good against Evil played out on the battlefield of Law against Chaos."

Quote from: Shasarak on May 26, 2021, 08:20:54 PM
Speaking of Alignment, a recent Jordan Peterson quote struck me:

"Life is a battle of Good against Evil played out on the battlefield of Law against Chaos."

knew he was a fuckin dork with insufficient bullying in his youth

Quote from: This Guy on May 26, 2021, 08:21:50 PM

Quote from: Shasarak on May 26, 2021, 08:20:54 PM
Speaking of Alignment, a recent Jordan Peterson quote struck me:

"Life is a battle of Good against Evil played out on the battlefield of Law against Chaos."

knew he was a fuckin dork with insufficient bullying in his youth

Who would have thought, a Harvard Professor turns out to be a fucking dork.   

Tonight at 11 This Guy gives us his opinion on Water: Wet or not?

Quote from: Shasarak on May 26, 2021, 08:20:54 PM
Speaking of Alignment, a recent Jordan Peterson quote struck me:

"Life is a battle of Good against Evil played out on the battlefield of Law against Chaos."

Yeah, I would take anything that guy says with a grain of salt. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/how-dangerous-is-jordan-b-peterson-the-rightwing-professor-who-hit-a-hornets-nest

Good and evil are not real concepts in the real world, they're subjective, just like they are in a few D&D settings, like Eberron, Ravnica, and Theros.

Quote from: UndyingDM on May 26, 2021, 09:03:24 PM

Quote from: Shasarak on May 26, 2021, 08:20:54 PM
Good and evil are not real concepts in the real world, they're subjective, just like they are in a few D&D settings, like Eberron, Ravnica, and Theros.

Thats not true.  How do you start to imagine that is the case?  You would have to be living a pretty protected life.

Quote from: UndyingDM on May 26, 2021, 09:03:24 PMGood and evil are not real concepts in the real world, they're subjective

True, but the idea of them being subjective is dropped for the purpose of social functionality.
Nobody walks an old lady across the street and says
'It was my socially pressured, collective conscious instinct mam.'
Good and Evil are subjective, and society completely falls apart if it actually internalizes those facts (instead of lying to ourselves that we do).

Quote from: Mistwell on May 26, 2021, 02:07:27 PM
So, in case anyone was still thinking RPGPundit was posting accurate information about D&D:

1) Ravenloft doesn't ban alignment.
2) Ravenloft doesn't make Drow good.
3) The RPGPundit hasn't even read the book he's talking about.

Wasn't this obviously tongue in cheek?

Quote from: UndyingDM on May 26, 2021, 09:03:24 PM

Quote from: Shasarak on May 26, 2021, 08:20:54 PM
Speaking of Alignment, a recent Jordan Peterson quote struck me:

"Life is a battle of Good against Evil played out on the battlefield of Law against Chaos."

Yeah, I would take anything that guy says with a grain of salt. https://www.theguardian.com/science/2018/feb/07/how-dangerous-is-jordan-b-peterson-the-rightwing-professor-who-hit-a-hornets-nest

Good and evil are not real concepts in the real world, they're subjective, just like they are in a few D&D settings, like Eberron, Ravnica, and Theros.

Perhaps, but without some form of ethical and moral foundation, you get moral relativism, which is absolute shit and should be opposed.

Quote from: Shasarak on May 26, 2021, 09:08:52 PM

Quote from: UndyingDM on May 26, 2021, 09:03:24 PM

Quote from: Shasarak on May 26, 2021, 08:20:54 PM
Good and evil are not real concepts in the real world, they're subjective, just like they are in a few D&D settings, like Eberron, Ravnica, and Theros.

Thats not true.  How do you start to imagine that is the case?  You would have to be living a pretty protected life.

It is true. There are some objectively evil/bad things in the real world, but almost everything in the real world is a shade of gray, not truly good or truly bad.

For example, in the Amazon rain forest, there was/is a tribe that practiced cannibalism as a religious practice on their deceased tribe members. Cannibalism is typically considered evil and taboo in the real world, but it wasn't by this tribe, and was seen as a good thing to them. How can there be objective good and evil if what one person sees as evil can be what someone else sees as good, especially when the act seen as evil is not affecting or harming the other person in any way?

I do know bad people in the real world. I know completely selfish and narcissistic people who harm everyone around them and leech happiness from their friends and family members, including their children. I fully consider these people that I know to be evil, and their abuse of another person to be evil, however, the acts that they are doing are not evil, their intent is. If someone was unknowingly doing the same thing to someone else, that wouldn't be evil, that would just be innocent ignorance. If the act isn't evil, but the intent is, how can evil be a thing? If it's just a societal construct that depends on your viewpoint, your intent, and your environment, how can your action be evil?

That's my point. Objective good and evil don't exist in the real world, because objectively evil and good actions are dependent on the person and environment, and is thus subjective. The same thing applies to multiple D&D worlds (like the Blood of Vol in Eberron, which is seen as taboo, but aren't evil).

Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Wari%CA%BC#Cannibalism

Quote from: This Guy on May 25, 2021, 12:01:08 PM
"from myth and moral absolutes of heroic fantasy"

i take it back, pundit has no hate for didactic rpgs, he just wants the right didactics.

No, I just don't want every RPG product to be Brave-new-World style propaganda for leftist agendas and ruining the settings in order to force every D&D campaign to have 2021 Seattle Values in both the play level AND the setting level.