NOW LIVE! Today's the day you meet your new best friend. You don’t have to leave Wolfy behind... In 'Pets & Sidekicks' your companions level up with you!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="MG.0" data-source="post: 6780018" data-attributes="member: 6799436">A useless strawman argument.I'm the one arguing that all the players' views are important.Another strawman...you are 0 for 2.All the players' views should be considered important by the DM. Players can indeed make contrasting concepts work just fine in the same party if they apply more than one brain cell to the problem, or aren't deliberately being jerks. Sometimes the DM can offer some guidance in how to roleplay their differences without creating friction between the players - because the players having fun is the ONLY point to the game. A DM deciding outright a player can't choose to play a character that doesn't worship the gods without subjecting him to ridiculous in-game punishments is bad DM'ing. In fact, it's pretty much synonymous with being an <img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" /><img src="https://cdn.jsdelivr.net/joypixels/assets/8.0/png/unicode/64/1f642.png" class="smilie smilie--emoji" loading="lazy" width="64" height="64" alt=":)" title="Smile    :)"  data-smilie="1"data-shortname=":)" />....and then you go completely off the rails and start making assumptions about me....strike three, you lose.I actually don't have much of an opinion on the religion of the Realms. Overall I think the Realms is a pretty lousy campaign setting because it has been bastardized for years by a flood of authors and poor material. Greyhawk is better - mostly simply by virtue of having been ignored.The only problem I have is certain people on the forum who seem to have to try overly-eagerly to discredit every possible idea thrown out that would allow alternative interpretations of religion, faith, gods, and cosmology in general. I've known just a handful of those types of people in person while gaming over the years. Invariably, they are bad DM's and bad players. They will cite every reason under the sun as to why "this" can't be or "that" would never work. They incite friction between players by insisting on interpreting things like alignment or racial behavior in the strictest, most narrow interpretation possible and allowing no other interpretation. In short: narrow-minded, often bigoted, and unimaginative.</blockquote>

Verification