Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Dykstrav" data-source="post: 3210340" data-attributes="member: 40522">I don't tend to think of D&D as a 'box' with discrete borders between what is and isn't outside the game. It's more of a menu, a list of options you can use for your games.In the thread you're referring to, yes, it is technically possible under the rules as they are written to get a demon to turn to lawful good and thus be eligible to become a paladin's cohort. I think most people are rejecting the logic of the situation, not its validity or merit. Personally, I'd wonder about the state of the game if there wasn't a certain amount of internal consistency. Despite what a recent sourcebook claimed up front, D&D is still about knights and castles and dragons to many players. They enjoy playing from the baseline without wierd critters and newfangled classes. Doesn't make them bad players or bad people.It's possible to play D&D without making references to Tolkien or western Europe. The thing is, if you stray too far from this model, you need to expect the players to need some time to get used to the ideas. It's a challenge to create a compelling party of human, elven, and dwarven fighters, clerics, and wizards. Usually the campaign takes a few sessions to gel and everyone to really feel like they're getting to know their characters and the campaign. Now imagine what happens when you have a half-troll swordsage with a vampiric bloodline, a neutral evil hound archon warlock, and an exalted spellscale favored soul. It's not inherently a 'bad' game based on the content, but it is different. It might not be what every player wants for their game.</blockquote>

Verification