Relay-Version: version B 2.10 5/3/83; site utzoo.UUCP
Posting-Version: version B 2.10.1 5/3/83; site ukc.UUCP
Path: utzoo!linus!philabs!cmcl2!seismo!mcvax!ukc!ncg
From: ncg@ukc.UUCP (N.C.Gale)
Newsgroups: net.games.frp
Subject: Re: Alignments
Message-ID: <5121@ukc.UUCP>
Date: Fri, 17-May-85 09:34:35 EDT
Article-I.D.: ukc.5121
Posted: Fri May 17 09:34:35 1985
Date-Received: Mon, 13-May-85 00:19:26 EDT
Reply-To: ncg@ukc.UUCP (Nige Gale)
Distribution: net
Organization: Computing Laboratory, U of Kent at Canterbury, UK
Lines: 21


There were a couple of articles pasting the Alignments concept.
The thing is about role-playing games is that they are *role*-playing.
Alignments is a clumsy way of imposing a personality upon the
character.

Without alignments, the party becomes a profit-making unit, and
characters are good or evil as it suits the players at the time,
and will inevitably fall victim to munchkinism.

Certainly, the 3X3 system is too restricting and vague, and GMs should
expand it/ change it completely to their own tastes.
My own preference is for a system that includes personality disorders,
phobias, etc.
It gives a player an excuse for behaving like a pillock -

"I'm only playing my alignment"

when otherwise the others would just assume that he is really a pillock.

-Nige Gale