Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="Rel" data-source="post: 2408505" data-attributes="member: 99">Actually I DO see him as more of a &quot;kick in the door&quot; style player.&nbsp; Just one who likes to play Clerics instead of Fighters or Barbarians.&nbsp; And this in no way clashes with the core rules as they are presented in the book.&nbsp; But of course there are some added restrictions (ones that I'm not sure whether Bob agreed to or were simply presented to him as the desires of the majority of the group) about how Divine characters must behave that go beyond the restrictions in the core rules.It just sounds to me like if the restrictions that are in place were not in place that this guy wouldn't be that much of a problem and the way the other players played wouldn't need to change much (if any).&nbsp; The only thing that would change substantially is some of the background assumptions of the campaign.&nbsp; Keeping any of the guys in my group would be worth changing some background material in the campaign.</blockquote>

[QUOTE="Rel, post: 2408505, member: 99"] Actually I DO see him as more of a "kick in the door" style player. Just one who likes to play Clerics instead of Fighters or Barbarians. And this in no way clashes with the core rules as they are presented in the book. But of course there are some added restrictions (ones that I'm not sure whether Bob agreed to or were simply presented to him as the desires of the majority of the group) about how Divine characters must behave that go beyond the restrictions in the core rules. It just sounds to me like if the restrictions that are in place were not in place that this guy wouldn't be that much of a problem and the way the other players played wouldn't need to change much (if any). The only thing that would change substantially is some of the background assumptions of the campaign. Keeping any of the guys in my group would be worth changing some background material in the campaign. [/QUOTE]

Verification