From: zaghadka@hotmail.com   
      
   On Wed, 24 Dec 2025 00:14:34 +0100, Gottfried Neuner   
    wrote:   
      
   >Alignments are the big no-no. Yes, they made a tiny bit of sense in   
   >Chainmail, and there is a marginal bit of sense in having it as a three   
   >alignment system in OD&D. But everything that came after it was just   
   >trying to make the best of a bad job.   
   >In effect it's better to just drop them altogether. I mean, how many   
   >other games even have alignment in their rules?   
   >(uhm... RIFTS and the other games in that sphere I think)   
      
   Moreover, watch a D&D group have fits over what is "good" and/or "evil."   
   Chainmail's Chaos, Neutral, Law made sense. Pretty cut-and-dry. Do you   
   value institutions or the individual's contributions to effect change?   
      
   But good and evil? It starts to depend on what the player's   
   political/religious leanings are, and that does not belong at any gaming   
   table. Every edition has some half-assed definition of this axis, but it   
   really is so subjective that it isn't worth bothering.   
      
   --   
   Zag   
      
   Give me the liberty to know, to think, to believe,   
   and to utter freely according to conscience, above   
   all other liberties.                ~John Milton   
      
   --- SoupGate-Win32 v1.05   
    * Origin: you cannot sedate... all the things you hate (1:229/2)