Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Mirtek" data-source="post: 6780026" data-attributes="member: 40810">No, you are arguing that only the player who represents your world-view is important, the other players should shut up and try to accommodate to him Which to your definition is as simple as putting aside their view to let him have his without any natural drawbacks Well, if one were to decide it by the majorty view in this thread, it's pretty clear who lost long ago and if only shouting from the offside as he's not even in the game anymore. Of course "ignored" in this case not only means by the publisher (so they at least didn't ruin it), but also by the D&D fanbase, as FR's huge lead in popularity proves.Yeah, because bringing a character who continously proclaims that the most sacred believe of the divine class PC, the one that serving is the center of their live and the next one too, is a fraud not worthy of worship is totally lubing the party's gearsClergy of most good deities would walk away very soon after he proves unreformable, with very few exceptions (maybe clerics of Ilmater), while most clerics of neutral deities might get violent much sooner (better not try this with a priest of Tempus) although even some very stern LG warrior deities could have clergy that would violently defend their deity from such slander (Tyr seems likely)</blockquote>