At best alingments could be a starting point for a character. but you can't arbitrarily decide what a character is. is a baby goblin has to be evil? and what if he was raised in a Paladin Tample? what about characters like Jaime Lennister or Theon Grayjoy? Does a baby who was raised by Shar but never got out to the world, and only now learns of its complexities cannot be redeemed and must automatically be killed by a band of Paladin irrespective of his actual deeds? how does it make the Paladins good, and not a bunch of fanatic zealots?
Originally Posted by Zarna
What do you consider biased roadblocks? Characters shouldn't act only of their alignment. If Shadowheart does good things and likes if you are nice in some situations, this to me makes her have more depth. Same thing with a good character, they should have moments where they aren't so nice. None of this should prevent you from forming an opinion about any character and treating them accordingly but it should make you think a bit.
I am kind of glad they are not obsessing over alignment and wish they would take out the cleric tag for it as well. A lot of players jump to instant conclusions about a character once they find out the alignment and this is just stupid. Even players often limit themselves to acting only within a certain alignment if forced to pick at character selection instead of freely doing whatever they feel is right at the time.
totally agree. I'm sure there are characters who are unambiguously evil or good (after some time with BG3 I can safely say Astarion), but some characters have potential to change and grow.
final question - is Darth Vader Evil? and if he is, was he evil as a boy, and more importantly, was he evil when he killed the emparor?
