Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="D+1" data-source="post: 1997345" data-attributes="member: 13654">I try to avoid speculating too much on the other side of the story simply because it IS speculation.  If I do that I certainly try to remember to point out that I AM simply commention on speculation.  Sometimes it's a little obvious that there IS another side to the story that needs to be heard because certain issues that repeatedly come up always do.  In this case I've probably been at least a little over-focused on one side I admit, but this roleplaying purity stuff really pushes my buttons.People use purity of roleplaying as an excuse for being a BAD roleplayer (or more accurately a bad PLAYER) quite often.  It's like political correctness - you can't even question it without being effectively labelled as a disgusting, thoughtless, rabid opponent.  "But I'm just being true to my character!" is the rallying cry of a WEAK roleplayer who is being caught acting like a jerk for no compelling reason.  Nobody has the right to create a CE assassin and introduce it into a group of LG characters and then claim "But I was just roleplaying my character!" when it disrupts the entire game and gets players angry as their PC's drop dead from a poisoned blade.  Same thing here.  "My CHARACTER wants the resurrection to go to the NPC and if you disagree then you're a bad roleplayer, AND if you don't go along with me I'll refuse to accept the NEXT PC that comes along?"The DM here is overstepping his bounds by "insisting" that the resurrection go to the PC, but it seems apparant that the player could expect no less a reaction if his attitude is anything like the way it's being presented to us.</blockquote>

Verification