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="Hussar" data-source="post: 6780865" data-attributes="member: 22779">See, no, I disagree.  We're not talking about some minor disagreement here.  We're talking about one character denying another character's complete belief system.  And, not only that, but having the stated goal that if the character ever has the opportunity, that character will tear down the other character's belief system.  If the only reason we're keeping the faithless character around is to be a "meat shield" why would we not get a meat shield that we could actually count on and trust?  It's not like a given character isn't replaceable.  To go back to your gnome character.  There's a very salient point there.  Yup, he's a god defying character.  He's also insane.  It makes his defiance of the gods somewhat suspect when he's wearing his underpants on his head.  It would be very interesting to see what that character would believe if his insanity was ever cured - through a Heal spell (does that still cure insanity in 5e?) or whatnot.  Would he still believe what he believes if he wasn't insane?So, sure, if your background is, "Yeah, I defy the gods and all they stand for, but, I'm also crazier than a bag of rats and about as reliable as a cardboard hammer" then, no worries.  It's not like anyone is going to take your beliefs seriously, regardless of what those beliefs are.  I was thinking more in a case of a group where the characters are being played straight.  I'm still wondering why a group would accept someone whose stated goals are pretty much what people burn people at the stake for.  "Oh, he's a heretic, but that's okay, he kills orcs good" doesn't ring very true to me.</blockquote>

Verification