Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="wedgeski" data-source="post: 1819634" data-attributes="member: 16212">This is not such an extreme. If I read the OP correctly the player in question has found a style of play that goes against the *expectations* of the rest of the group. It's hardly campaign destroying. Her background sounds like it fits just fine.   Why not? Sounds like fun. Perhaps one of the PC's has taken the barbarian under his wing in an attempt to 'civilize' him. Perhaps one of the character's enemies has uncovered the brute as a relative of one of his rivals in an attempt to discredit him. There are any number of ways to fit such a character in and add richness to the campaign. Honestly, I do take your point. It's just one I've never, ever agreed with. <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=":)" />   Except this is a *campaign*, not a one-off dungeon crawl. If a player came up with a suave aristocrat after being asked to roll up a character for the Tomb of Horrors, I might quirk an eyebrow, but I'd be interested to see how he fared. You might then find that a large proportion of the encounters are neatly sidestepped or pushed dramatically in the PC's favour by equivocation and quick talking. Who's to say? It's possible I have a 'thing' about this. How can anyone expect a roleplayer to commit to a campaign in which they must play a character with whom they don't engage?</blockquote>

Verification