Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="MoogleEmpMog" data-source="post: 2408142" data-attributes="member: 22882">Actually, it clearly does work for the group as a whole, unless the posters involved are lying, which based on prior experience with them I find highly unlikely.It wouldn't work for me.&nbsp; I like Eberron's hands-off approach to the gods, perhaps because it's also the Robert E. Howard approach, and as such it's the one I've been using since long before Eberron.&nbsp; If a GM were to use the approach ForceUser has, I would be disinclined to play a cleric.I'm not there, and not relevant.What is relevant is that, by Force User's description, the group as a whole does like this setup, and likes it a lot.One person does not.&nbsp; That one person continually chooses to play a cleric over and over again.&nbsp; Despite the wishes of the others?&nbsp; From what I've heard here, I'd guess rather more because of those wishes, with the premeditated intent of being an ass and seeing how much he can abuse his so-called &quot;friends.&quot;If &quot;Bob&quot; were a powergamer, he could switch to druid and be better than he already is.&nbsp; Or he could be a psychic warrior.&nbsp; Or he could be a cleric with the serial numbers filed off.If I, as &quot;Bob's&quot; GM, believed that he wanted to play a cleric for powergaming reasons (once or twice), I would be delighted to file those serial numbers off.&nbsp; I crusade against D&amp;D's pseudo-archetypical classes all the time.But when he continually does it over and over again in a campaign where the cleric issue is clearly very important to the other players?BOOT.&nbsp; NOW.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="MoogleEmpMog, post: 2408142, member: 22882"] Actually, it clearly [U]does[/U] work for the [U]group as a whole[/U], unless the posters involved are lying, which based on prior experience with them I find highly unlikely. It wouldn't work for me. I like Eberron's hands-off approach to the gods, perhaps because it's also the Robert E. Howard approach, and as such it's the one I've been using since long before Eberron. If a GM were to use the approach ForceUser has, I would be disinclined to play a cleric. I'm not there, and not relevant. What is relevant is that, by Force User's description, the group as a whole [U]does[/U] like this setup, and likes it a lot. [U]One[/U] person does not. That one person continually chooses to play a cleric over and over again. Despite the wishes of the others? From what I've heard here, I'd guess rather more [U]because[/U] of those wishes, with the premeditated intent of being an ass and seeing how much he can abuse his so-called "friends." If "Bob" were a powergamer, he could switch to druid and be [U]better[/U] than he already is. Or he could be a psychic warrior. Or he could be a cleric with the serial numbers filed off. If I, as "Bob's" GM, believed that he wanted to play a cleric for powergaming reasons (once or twice), I would be delighted to file those serial numbers off. I crusade against D&D's pseudo-archetypical classes all the time. But when he continually does it over and over again in a campaign where the cleric issue is clearly very important to the other players? BOOT. NOW. [/QUOTE]

Verification