Hey angry lil' f---, you're way out of line bro. For starters who cares if a wrong idiom is used.
Secondly this is a game. The alignments exist to make an attempt at clarifying the varied personas and belief systems around, into a workable context for roleplaying. There are 'neutral' religeons such as Buddhism which maintain as close to a neutral stance as could be defined in gaming terms.
To attack the alignments is to attack D&D without offering a better solution yourself. It's easy to slag off the designers work and others responses to your (lack of) argument, and far more difficult to propose an alternative. The universes creator has made an impossibly complex reality that we can only failingly replicate in any game. So back off man.
Thirdly, cities are NOT part of the balance of nature, they are recently constructed desecrators of the environment - a fact which should be obvious to anyone who walks through a smog filled city trying to get clear air. To propose a city/nature balance is ludicrous in the extreme. City destroys nature but nature doesn't destroy city.
Finally the alignments represent a belief system, a life code. As humans are faliable beings, inclined at various stages to ignore or contradict that code, of course there will be instances of failure, and an impossibilty to completely adhere to it. There is an attempted acknowledgement of that in the game by having FALLEN Paladins and Rangers.
Remember that (as I wrote in a previous thread) if Ultimate Good = putting others needs ahead of your own (eg. a Mother Theresa type person) and Ultimate Evil = completing own agenda at the expense of others (eg. A genocidal Dictator) then it would be impossible for a truly good character to complete Baldurs Gate at all, due to the 'necessity' of destroying human life.
Enjoy the GAME lil'man. I do.
|