D&D Character Creation Taboos| Dungeons and Dragons Discussions

[@Nerdarchy]

Help Support Nerdarchy by Shopping at YOUR Favorites Places on the Internet. Just use these links and shop as usual. Nothing changes for you- Amazon- amzn.to/2jf0boA Nerdarchy the Store- goo.gl/M4YZEQ Drive Thru RPG- goo.gl/6nf5zh Easy Roller Dice- goo.gl/1n0M1r D&D and Think Geek Gear- goo.gl/LZAV5z Find Us- Patreon: www.patreon.com/Nerdarchy Website: www.Nerdarchy.com Facebook: facebook.com/Nerdarchy Nerdarchy Discord- goo.gl/qXEuGw Instagram: instagram.com/Nerdarchy/ Twitter: twitter.com/Nerdarchy

[@gbgamer9474]

Nerdarchy What about a necromancer who uses their power to help the innocent get vengeance for being unjustly slain? Like a sole survivor of a village who prayed for justice and was answered. They move forward after granting the same for others by raising the victims to let them enact their revenge with the knowledge that they will be put back to rest upon its completion.

[@RokuroCarisu]

GBGamer That sounds like a great idea for an anti-hero. Necromancers generally aren't good people, but they don't have to be entirely evil.

[@kevinsullivan3448]

RokuroCarisu I'm pretty sure that if you broaden your gaming experience you will find that the minority of games make necromancy inherenly EVIL.

[@nathanlaleff4273]

No such thing as "good necromancy?" What if you are a person whom knows how neceomancy is looked down upon but wants to do good with their powers and thus only uses the bodies of bad people, such as "evil" alligned people and criminals, to combat other baddies/enemies and after you are done with their body you cremate the remains to allow for the spirit to pass, symbolically allowing the person to redeem themselves even though they are already dead. If you play the character knowing that there might be people that sympathize or understand how you operate you could role play a "good" necromancer in a functionally sensible way.

[@ShadowAraun]

i actually play a Chaotic Good Aasimar Necromancer, his divine purpose is to reanimate the bodies of the evil and cruel and force those bodies to help him on his journey and perform acts of good, like saving a village, killing evil beings, etc. He typically only has 1 or 2 thralls at any time, and depending on the weight of their sins he controls them for anywhere from a couple day to a few months then takes them to be purified by positive energy, or purifies them himself if he is able.

[@blakecryer8425]

I have one taboo. I won't play a character without a backstory

[@Billman66]

I'm a guy. I don't play female characters. Hell, playing an elf is weird enough.

[@pontiffgoblin3200]

@@Billman66 elfcist

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

Me: Creates a Backstory. The Campaign: Uses non of it. Me: "I guess that was a waste of time."

[@JenoPaciano]

There's really only one taboo across the board. You don't create a character who refuses to cooperate with the rest of the party. D&D is a group game about a _band_ of adventurers, not one adventurer. It isn't about your character. Trying to make the game about your character by refusing to work with the other players is the worst thing you can do. Like anyone else, I have peeves. I don't like it when people insist on playing awkwardly creepy characters. I don't like players nonstop flirting with NPCs or each other's characters. And I don't like male players that only ever play attractive female characters. But none of those things comes close to someone who won't get along with the party.

[@Nerdarchy]

The lone wolf is the worst. Nerdarchist Dave

[@ClaireZhasa]

There's nothing inherently wrong with a lone wolf character, it's all about how a character is played. For example, my monk started out this way because of her backstory; after her family was murdered and entire village burnt to the ground, she was left, lost and alone in the massive forest where she remained homeless for about 4 years. On top of that, she's been blind since birth and as the campaign starts she's pulled from her world via magic into a completely different world filled with creatures and races that didn't exist in her world. Essentially she's a blind, homeless, extremely frightened child in an extremely foreign place. She has since come to trust her party as if they were family, it just took time

[@druwhite1388]

I disagree Edit: sorry hit send to fast. I disagree because lone wolves are real life people. As a thief I was a lone wolf a lot no because I was edgy but because my job was illegal and they were all heroes and my character didnt want his fam in jail. So any theft or flank he did he did alone was happy with half them hated 1 character. But no ones gonna get along 24/7 if I dobt like ur character and my character hates your character it's a conflict it makes it better we tolerate each other rival and even sabotage each other the story gets better.

[@Nr4747]

I would also add to this that creating a non-adventurer is a taboo (something you took for granted, it seems). If you want to play Bill, the farmer, who ignores the call for adventure and continues tilling his fields for 30 more years, you're going to have to create another character to play Decent into Avernus with the rest of the group.

[@SlimothyPlays]

As someone who is athiest/agnostic IRL. Being athiest in a world filled with magic, where gods and demons talk to people on the daily and grant them power makes absolutely no sense.

[@h.s.6269]

Some people are atheists because of trauma or grudges. That might be why some can't comfortably handle addressing the topic of it in game. In my case I don't think I'd have a problem being a cleric or paladin, I'd probably just be an awkward one, which could make for some funny rp, lol. I'm not atheist but irl it is a sensitive topic for me, in game though it isn't a problem at all and it can add different dynamics having a world be affected by gods. I think it just adds more depth and opportunities.

[@kmcd6140]

From the sound of things, I'm thinking the guy in the story was an angry believer, rather than a true atheist. That level of sensitivity comes from being wounded, not simply believing differently.

[@Treblaine]

It'd be like not believing in nuclear weapons, as in you thought they never existed, it's all a sham. There are GENUINELY people like that today, they just say "nah, it's all fake, it's all a trick, nuclear bombs are impossible, never made, not even attempted". Nuclear weapons are kinda like the gods of DnD, they've only been seen at their full power by a few people often long before many were born, to even look at them directly would blind you, they have awesome power to destroy the entire world yet they seem to work for earthly powers and don't claim have made the world.

[@kylestanley7843]

@@h.s.6269 I'm the same way, religion is a bit of a sore spot for me, but I've successfully gotten along with religious people in the past. It's my thing, no one else's, and I'm not gonna be a little shit about it because a satirical game made me bend a knee. Like, this is the thalassic deity of a 100% fictional world, and it is not you that's praising them; it's your character. Chill.

[@markl8679]

In a world where gods and demons actually exist, it would be very hard to be an atheist. The definition of atheism is 'the disbelief in a god or gods', NOT 'knowing gods don't exist'. In the dnd world, there would be a huge amount of evidence for the existence of gods and demons, Unlike our world.

[@Nurriek]

I had a friend who refused to play a low CHA character. Such to the point that when we did 3d6, no rerolls, he rolled really well for his barbarian, cept for the 1 dreaded 3. And that 3 went into his Int. It was at the point where the DM said that he couldn't even speak. So we had to try and communicate with him like a trained animal. It was great. His reasoning was that he refused to "Play an ugly character." And no amount of explaining that CHA isn't how you appear would shake him of it.

[@Nerdarchy]

Some people just have their hang ups. Sounds like it was still fun. Definitely works for a raised by animals or mentally disabled character with the super low int. Nerdarchist Dave

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

Oof... An ASI of 3 which is a -3 Modifier... Being a Farmer Character in DnD 5e is NOT fun when your party is above 10 (0 Modifier). But also... Even a Brute knows what to do on a human level... Sentience is not animalistic intelligence.

[@Nurriek]

@@absolstoryoffiction6615 Hate to be the "Acktshually" guy, but there's a few inconsistencies in what you said. First, a score of 3 is a -4 modifier. Second, this is a reason why Int and Wis are differentiated. Intelligence is the capability of one's mind. Wisdom is the capacity of ones understanding. To say an individual would not be animalistic in their demeanor with an int that low is mixing your black-and-white into grey. And I can only assume you'd do that because you're averse to the idea that someone can just be stupid with a low enough int score. He had a high enough Wisdom score that he could still achieve understanding. But he couldn't speak more than a few words, with some difficulty, which is why we could communicate our intents to him at all. His mind was not capable of that higher level thought. You'll see this reflected in a bunch of statlines for creatures in D&D, specifically when you compare Beasts with Humanoids or smarter. A 3 is the same intelligence as a Mastiff, and is just above that of a horse. Were you to say "Mastiffs are smart" that means "Smart for a dog." not "Smart enough to be a wizard or a doctor." On the fond, plus side, having an int that low carried the added, hidden benefit of being immune to some spells. Tasha's Uncontrollable Hideous Laughter (2e). I remember it quite well. The player slurred out "I dun geddit." in response. Quite funny, actually.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

@@Nurriek I forgot how to count the modifiers backwards since it's by +1 per even number from 10 to 20. An Int of 3 or a Wis of 3, is not equitable to Sentience and Higher Intelligence. Since Sentience is not dependent on Intelligence and vise versa. Otherwise, most of the common races would just be animals at best and the most intelligent animal would only act for instinctual needs. No true Free Will. But for the Stats, Int and Wis... A Book and a Wise Man is the analogy... So, you're correct.

[@Nurriek]

@@absolstoryoffiction6615 That's misleading at best, and outright false at worst, though. Those numbers are representations, and imperfect ones to be certain, but they're fundamental representations. A 3 in strength does not mean "strong in other ways." It means undeniably weak, frail, or otherwise lacking in physical prowess. For context, their maximum carrying capacity. In older editions of the game, this person could not carry more than 10 pounds. In current, 5e rules, this person will not be capable of more than 45. I understand not wanting to be judgemental. But you can't avoid judgement via the exclusion of the obvious. Intelligence is the capability of ones mind. A certain level of capability is required for sentient, self aware thought. 3 intelligence falls below that threshold. No matter how smart your dog is, self awareness isn't a trait attributed to them. If you'd like to prove your point, you can find a creature with 3 intelligence score that could reasonably be defined as "self aware." And I'll be more than happy to continue the discussion. But to me, it looks a lot like you just don't want to be mean to people who aren't as capable. Affirming that people exist who lack that capacity isn't a cruelty. It's an affirmation of reality. Intelligence is graded on a bell curve. That curve has a lower end. It's not mean to say that, or even affirm that in our fantasy settings.

[@Nilandia]

Funnily enough, I did play a good-aligned necromancer way back in 4th ed. Her angle was that her necromancy was extreme ancestor worship and the spirits she raised were those of her ancestors choosing to come to her aid. I was fully expecting people to get weirded out by her, since she literally started looking like the dead she called on, though she was alive, and her spellcasting staff was the spinal column and skull of one of her ancestors. Never came up, for some reason.

[@BabyConan41]

I have long been against the people who argue in favor of "good" necromancers, but I think you have found the one way to actually pull this off to where even I am convinced. Awesome, awesome character!

[@supremehare9893]

I wonder if your character liked............ cheeeesse.

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

@@BabyConan41 God Touched Undead Necromancer: "What is... Hate?"

[@paulcoy9060]

1:50 What?! I'm the exact opposite. I'm an atheist, and so I LOVE playing Clerics and Paladins, because they have proof that their Gods exist. I have tons of splat books about other Gods, it's a great read, and leads to great role play, as I can quote the God's books and try to convert other characters.

[@paulcoy9060]

Like in "Planescape", where one of the factions went around telling everyone that the so-called Gods are just really powerful aliens or high-high level Adventurers ?

[@GiantSpaceCrabGrab]

I think there was a setting where an "atheist" was someone who either didn't follow the gods or thought that the gods were to far beyond mortals to care about

[@Driekan]

+paul coy Like you said, yes - the Athar faction in Planescape contested that the gods were actually divine beings. It is worth noting that XP is a thing that exists in this universe. It isn't understood, and it isn't referenced by its rule-system terminology, but it is a stated fact of the setting that a seasoned adventurer (say, a level 12 fighter) could take on a small army by himself (say, 500 level 1 Combatants) and not break a sweat. After level 9 or so, most D&D characters are damn near comic book superheroes. And that's just mid-level. This is a universe where you can get additional experience infinitely. Get to the low 20s, and you are a match for a fair few demigods. Get to the 30s, and you could storm the realm of most lesser gods a beat them head-on. Get to the 40s and you are indistinguishable from a god. ... which means the Athar are kinda right?

[@93Flowrider]

That's why my brother adores playing Cleric or Priest characters.

[@Nyrufa]

What's even stranger is there is *physical evidence* to support religion in D&D. The gods will actually come down from their holy thrones to interact with you from time to time. Probably not a good idea to piss them off! >:D

[@schwarzerritter5724]

Wouldn't an atheist in a world where gods can be proven to be exit the equivalent of a flat earther in real life?

[@zhoupact8567]

Well. Yes and no. While the evidence may be strong for there being gods. For one thing, what is a god. While the character may agree that the godly beings are gods in the sense of status. Similar to the status of king. The character may believe that they are not truly gods. For that matter, he may not believe they are gods at all depending on the setting. Sure the clerics and the paladins gain power from apparently worshiping something. However depending on the world and the knowledge the character has about the orders. He may simply think that they are tapping from some similar but different source to mages. Maybe its really just demons who feed of worship rather than gods. It is not like everyone meets gods. The common peasant's may never experience any sort of godly thing at all during their life. Basically they may not buy the evidence presented. They may not dismiss the possibility that the gods can very well be real. However they may think that there could be other explanations that also make sense. However when standing face to face with a god. I guess one would have to give some good explanation. XD I do see how comparing them to flat earthers is not the worst comparing there is. _________________________________ Take Dragon Ball as an example. There may be characters who are classed as gods. God of destruction for example. But even the dude who is on earth, is kame. Or basically god. The god of earth. Sure they may have the status of a god. But in large part they are not really any different from humans. I have a hard time agreeing that the gods in the dragon ball universe are gods at all. For having grown up with Christianity. I guess I expect more of a god. But that is naturally my own opinions butting in. They clearly are similar to a lot of gods from other mythologies. However, other than not having a different classification to put them under, I would not call Thor, Zeus and the likes gods at all. Why and where do one put the classification of calling something a god? Could really powerful and advanced aliens be gods? Or would they simply be very advanced normal creatures?

[@josephlane1614]

The gods of d&d are not gods as we christians veiw them, as they are not nigh as powerful. They are excedeingly powerful though. It's sort of like claiming a nuke is not scary. It can decimate everything in its area, but because it doesn't destroy the whole world like you expect, it isn't scary. Of course that is foolish logic though.

[@zhoupact8567]

It depends on the setting though. It is not as if we could not place a god just like those from the dominant religions of today in there. For that matter, you could even have several of those. But I think the main reasons that is not done. It is probably that such a god is pretty boring. You can not really do anything with such a being. As soon as you do, you start making cracks in the claims made about said god.

[@Raptor2291]

Atheist in D&D aren't really atheist, they are more like misotheist or dystheist. They know and recognize that gods exist, they just refuse to worship any for various reasons, like a hatred of them, or believing they aren't truly divine.

[@rayopaw9220]

pretty much, I am an atheist and I think what that guy did is dumb ass hell. Like is way better to say that you dont like the gods of the world or you have a grudge against them.

[@duranpredur1098]

8:55 "You are disrupting the lifeforce of beings, that is not very cool of you" Said the warrior, picking out fragments of skullbones from the hammerhead of its weapon.

[@CelioHogane]

Yeah you know what is disrupting the lifeforce of beings? DECAPITATION.

[@thanotosomega]

Paladin's be like dude that is a horrific thing you are doing using the flesh of the dead as puppets, Necromancer just stares and asks the paladin to tell them all about the nine hells to which people are condemned because the gods were lazy or the wall innocent people are trapped in,

[@itsnotmereally1]

The warrior has not done a thing to the spirit or soul of the enemy he defeated. In fact, if the creature was religious and its deity is aligned with him, he just sent it to "heaven". The necromancer is taking a spirit from the afterlife, which any warrior type who has a lust for life and a hope for a heaven based on his glorious achievements would abhor .

[@zhoupact8567]

Is he? It seems to me I could use soul cage, and still reanimate the dead body. Make it into a zoble or whatever. I guess I may just miss something but I do not see where it says I can not do this. So unless it says something else somewhere, or its a difference in world/setting thing, then I do not see why making a zombie has anything to do with the soul of the person who used to live in said body. I would rather say that you basically simulate or create something that seem like a soul. That works with the basic functions of a soul. It may be that higher grade necromancy do call on the soul of the person who used to host the body. However I think it may also just be that the new husk of a soul that inhabits the body, has the ability to read the memories stored in the dead's brain. Basically the soul holds the final print, while the body holds the raw. Even if that would be the case tho, it would make sense for a paladin to just assume that its the actual soul of the person who was dragged back even if its not in fact the case. As for why animate object would not work on a dead body. Eh, I suppose that is a hard one. I would say its due to the body being organic while metal is not. But that falls apart with wood. Maybe a human body is simply too complex. You could make a body maybe move, and do basic stuff. But it would be more.... clumsy then even a zombie. Even if the husk of a soul created to fuel it, is very basic. And the brain power its able to use is very low. I would rule that it would still have that basic stuff going for it, making it able to somehow adapt in minor ways to follow its orders. While an object animated would not. Due to making a husk of a soul to fuel the body, unlike animate object, the undead gains stats the animated thing do not. I do wonder however. If one ignore the rules, and just look at the idea of how the magic would work. Could the animate object force a living being to move? I suppose if something already have animate object on it, you would not get an effect trying to animate the same object. So I guess not. Basically, a living human can not be effected by animate object. Not due to not being an object. But rather due to already being animated. It could make one wonder if animate object is like the base tire. Make life is the gods ultimate version of the animate object spell. While necromancy goes into trying to emulate said animate object spell. But again, the "souls" created, if you can even call them that. Are lacking the core that results would result in a "make life" spell. It may get close however. But the "souls" would not qualify for any sort of afterlife as said "soul" would probably break apart after it looses its host.

[@WintersMinion]

Or the Evocation wizard that burned the their enemies to death which is one of the worst ways to die.

[@Angus-McFife-2nd]

I'm an atheist but 1) Its a game with Gods. 2) Its literally a game. Just a game. Roleplay well and enjoy yourself.

[@Nerdarchy]

Yeah dude was a little weird. Nerdarchist Dave

[@topgriz5790]

@@Nerdarchy and as your co-host said, he was a Marine Recruiter, so that's probably why...that was a dick thing to say.

[@30noir]

Pretty much agree but someone casting a spell on a teammate and taking away that player's agency is as bad as pvp and should be discouraged.

[@30noir]

@sum body like I said, agree with that but it shouldn't have been provoked. We had a game in a campaign I'm in where we had a drop-in join for a single session. He thought it'd be fun to accept the necromancer's offer to join him. So he cast a spell on me and basically took over the character. By the end of the session his sorcerer lost his head but he didn't care. He'd had that character a few hours. I'd been playing mine for months so if it had been me who died because of someone joining who didn't take it seriously I'd be pretty annoyed myself.

[@RyanAcidhedzMurphy]

@sum body Would you feel the same way if the topic was something you had strong feelings about?

[@floydwhatchacallit6823]

That's so stupid. I'm an atheist and I'm playing a cleric. I don't believe in magic either but I'm not going to get upset about somebody casting magic missile. Lol

[@snate56]

The point is, while you might be an atheist, the character lives in a world where gods exist. They walk the earth, lend power to followers, create miracles, etc. all proven and verifiable. So your character would not be an atheist.

[@williamtorres4140]

@@snate56 He could be an Atheist. He could simply not believe they are Gods. For example a Very powerful Fey can grant you power and destroy everything in a continent. Yet he doesn't believe they are Gods. Powerful? Yes Godlike? Yes Gods? Nope.

[@theorycrafters7281]

You can be atheist in game, but to refuse to play a cleric because you're atheist is stupid.

[@sigloophold]

I think the most important comment was "He was a Marine recruiter, so maybe there was a screw loose..." Yep, that's probably what was going on. Don't hate on the atheists, I have never known an atheist to get violent about "religion" in a game with wizards, magic, orcs, etc.. I HAVE known people with mental illness to get violent and offended by ridiculous things that no reasonable person would waste their time getting mad about, because...mental illness! Atheism does not equal mental illness.

[@vinx.909]

He might have personal reasons as player to ignore the religion part of dnd. To force it on the player is quite a dick move

[@malkavthejester]

AD&D 2nd Ed., Al Qadim setting. I played an elf thief with a charisma of 6. That's after the "elf" bonus. The reason he went adventuring was because the other elves in his settlement encouraged him to leave town.

[@zacnyberg641]

Nikita Nopants hahah Funny dude

[@thequeenofnod7338]

Mine is negative con mods. I can't see myself ever doing that lol

[@heatherzespra]

my negative con bard died in like the second fight and it sucked but id still do it again

[@chummer2060]

I love playing characters with bad int or wis. A highlight was a dwarf and half-orc barbarian duo that went by "the 3 barbarians".

[@rustyshackleford9841]

Playing the same class, race, and subclass of your old character that just died

[@CoolVictor2002]

yeah, that would feel really weird

[@briansaad7574]

I'm an Atheist and paladins and clerics are my favorite classes to play. I love the idea that there would actually be Gods that have an impact on the world. I also play the other classes, but paladin is always the first thought to go through my head.

[@TheAlmightyPillock]

I'm an atheist and two things stand out to me. You are in a word where people KNOW gods are real. So you would not be an atheist, you would just be a theist that does not worship the gods. I love playing religious characters. And I don't mean Clerics and Palladins. My Half-Orc bard worships all the orc gods, cuts ears off of fallen characters that invoke thier gods to avoid retribution and buries rocks before a long jurny to help him find his way home. All my characters worship gods. Because the gods are real in D&D so people would. It would be part of the fabric of their lives.

[@ClarkyClark]

Jacob Gamm right? Same here. If I knew there were gods, hell yeah I'd be at least acknowledging them. And yeah, I like playing religious characters too. So much cool history and drama to it.

[@kyubii972]

Jacob Gamm the term escapes me at the moment I just woke up but there is a term for people who believe that the gods exist and they should not be worshipped because they are incompetent fools. That Mortals should take their Fates into their own hands and not rely on those who live amongst the clouds.

[@kyubii972]

Jacob Gamm they literally Grant Magic two people who believe in them I see no reason why Wizards would not worship gods. Or why a rogue wouldn't worship a god.

[@nkandas]

I'm a religious person and I love making my wizards atheists. The shape that takes depends on the world. If avatars of the God don't walk through the material plane, if cursing a God's name doesn't result in a lightning bolt, and if praying isn't a phone call with a deity then it is pretty simple to just say they don't exist. This is really a reflection of my views on our world. You see no real evidence of God in our world and that leads you to the conclusion that if Gods existed it would be easy to prove it and people would believe. I believe God exists so I think that despite evidence of a God's existence, proving that they exist would still be difficult, and many people wouldn't believe. Paladins and clerics perform miracles? There's a perfectly reasonable explanation for that, they are either charlatans or just performing magic that relies on an arcana force they fail to understand. Arcane atheism makes a great replacement for scientific atheism. I also like making my worlds with this as an option because I think it is more interesting, and sometimes they're right. A world with direct experimental ways to undoubtedly prove a God's existence are trickier. I usually give up then but I've toyed around with the idea of making a character who doesn't believe in the concept of a deity and merely sees individuals of incredible power. This character would be respectful but not worship and would most likely be looking for a path to gain that kind of power.

[@erichobbs4042]

I had a lot of fun playing a sceptical wizard. He started out as an atheist, and to be perfectly honest I designed the character specifically to annoy the DM. Every time a cleric would cast a spell he would come up with a logical explanation for what actually happened. My goddess healed you! No, what actually happened is that you manipulated the latent zero point energy to subconsciously open a channel to the arcane mana weave and channeled the quantum fluctuations in such a way as to reverse time in a specific point and close the wound. This led to all sorts of roll playing fun, until the DM sent a god to confront my character. I then stopped being a wizard and switched to a cleric whose schtick was evangelising all unbelievers to the good news about Tempus, the one true God. Sometimes you just got to have fun with it.

[@ssfbob456]

I'm an atheist and I could care less about divine beings in a fictional setting as long as they fit the setting, especially something like D&D where gods regularly interact in some way with mortals.

[@FancyKerbloops]

Could care less, or couldn't?

[@violetsapphire952]

kzbin.info/www/bejne/pZ6agGODe9Cgptk

[@FancyKerbloops]

So you care about divine beings in a fictional setting, then. Ok. Thanks for clarifying.

[@PhyreI3ird]

Right? It's really obnoxious seeing _that_ kind of atheist that's so petty and insecure about their own philosophies they have to hyper-project it on to fictional worlds where the shit literally exists. Now it might be interesting to see a spin taken where the character dislikes the gods and thinks that they infringe on personal responsibility and/or freedoms, but that's about as far as I think one could take atheism in almost any d&d setting.

[@ssfbob456]

PhyreI3ird exactly, give your character some reason to dislike the gods or some reason why they would refuse to acknowledge them, but ignoring such a major part of the world you're playing in just because you don't believe irl and even getting angry over it is pretty strange. Like I said, I have no problem with dieties in a fictional setting, as far as I'm concerned that's where they're the most real.

[@michealdrake3421]

I once played a character who was an atheist in a setting where the gods regularly and frequently interacted with mortals in really overt ways. He came up with loads of ad-hoc explanations for the supernatural phenomenae and his theories were always full of holes. The whole thing was done basically for the comedy value and we had a good time with it.

[@XboXgamerXboX]

I think this player would play a lot like Dale Gribble.

[@XboXgamerXboX]

Character*

[@barrybend7189]

My character doesn't worship a god but he knows they exist as they do visit the mortal realm. The reason is because half his relatives are demigods due to an uncle who shags any female he could get( king of chromatic dragons). Doesn't help my character as he's a Geomancer and half of his spells are locked out due to being clerical in nature.

[@lauravturner]

But... but if people hate gnomes... poor Scanlan.

[@Nerdarchy]

Sad, but true. Nerdarchist Dave

[@lauravturner]

@@Nerdarchy I mean... I wanted to make a MacGyver character recently. He would take everything not nailed down and make elaborate traps and unlikely solutions to most situations, but I felt like the tinkerer abilities of the gnomes would be perfect, so I now have a character called "Midget MacGyver." I'd be pretty sad if I couldn't run my silly gnome parody character just because some arsehole decided they didn't like gnomes for some reason.

[@lauravturner]

@@Nerdarchy thanks for the heart

[@Jacob-qr8pl]

Scanlan doesn't help the cause 🤣

[@GuardianTactician]

That was the point of Scanlan. He wanted to make a character that was the absolute worst, and Liam recommended Gnome Bard. Remember that they started out playing Pathfinder (1e).

[@CinderPyron]

Also playing evil characters makes me internally ill. I've tried, just not for me.

[@exqueue3813]

Think of how actors feel playing those people. It gets really bad when you deep dive into the evil character's personality, how they justify to themselves the terrible things they've done....and it sounds reasonable. I can play a mustache-twirling, maniacally laughing villain all day, that's a lot of what DMing major villains is. Trying to figure out how the villain thinks he's RIGHT is nauseating.

[@druwhite1388]

Same with me and good characters even seeing a LG character as a dm pisses me off and makes me sick. So I sympathize as long as u allow others to play evil we could be friends

[@TrainerJodie]

I had a similar experience to your atheist player. We had a guy who was an atheist that refused to have a character that believed in any gods. So, he decided to play a Paladin.... In 4e... Where Paladins had to have a deity.... He played an atheist paladin in the forgotten realms, where the gods actually interacted with the mortal races during the avatar crisis... He had anger issues as well, where him rolling bad or the DM, or sometimes even other players, rolling good would cause him to get up from the table, throw stuff, and yell at us. We eventually had to talk to him about it and he reacted so poorly that we encouraged him to just stop coming. We didn't want to kick him out, so we just said, "If this isn't fun, you shouldn't be playing, and when you're yelling and throwing stuff it's obvious you aren't having fun..." and he decided not to come back. Was a pretty weird experience, especially since it was one of my first tabletop D&D campaigns.

[@violetsapphire952]

Sigh. I wish more people could differentiate between themselves and their characters. This coming from an atheist who plays religious characters all the time. P.S. If I woke up in a D&D world one day where the gods polled up and talked to people, once I'd seen a bit of evidence that they actually did this, I would be a theist. I might not WORSHIP them, but it would just be silly to deny their existence when they're walking around in front of you.

[@TheEvilChipmunk]

TheLegendOf Aurthur , I've had similar experiences with deeply atheist players in my campaign. While I respect their real-life choice regarding religious expression, I always try to explain to them that, in *this* fantasy reality, God's clearly and provably exist. Clerics are walking proof of their existence, and any spellcaster with ranks in spellcraft can tell you that divine casters can cast spells that actually contact their deities. Given that, most "normal" people in a D&D universe would see an atheist as "crazy". Maybe even dangerous. One of players still refuses to worship a deity, even after I've tried to make clear that there is no upside and only downside to this position. It does get kind of weird.

[@seanheath4492]

“I don't hold with paddlin' with the occult," said Granny firmly. "Once you start paddlin' with the occult you start believing in spirits, and when you start believing in spirits you start believing in demons, and then before you know where you are you're believing in gods. And then you're in trouble." "But all them things exist," said Nanny Ogg. "That's no call to go around believing in them. It only encourages 'em.”

[@violetsapphire952]

Sean Heath Pratchett Quote = Instant Like.

[@megaflamer]

you showed some remarkable restraint there, I'd have kicked them out after the first infraction unless they apologised. I take an exceedingly hardline stance on irl abusive behaviour, doubly so since I have players in the group with depression that need the sessions to take a break from reality.

[@Mephestrial]

As a DM, my taboo is a group that feels the need to fill the typical party roles, tank, rogue, healer, etc... To combat this I disallow them from telling each other what kind of character they are creating. Afterwards I tailor the adventures, gear, and hireable npcs to fit the group instead.

[@trequor]

Mephestrial 5th is pretty good for allowing parties with any caliber of character

[@destroyerinazuma96]

We had a situation where the party had no specialist healer and the GM did provide no quest-related NPC to compensate. We adapted: we played "safer", our mage went easy on the damage dealing spells and we bought potions.

[@trequor]

Destroyer Inazuma As a DM i would probably give out more health potions as loot if i knew the party had no healing whatsoever

[@lorinatidc]

Agreed, these terms are totally cringe worth. I really don't like hearing them referred to these. Makes them shallow and expendable with a specific role, not a character being played by a friend who wants to be this PC.

[@kcrb0202]

My group is a paladin (tank), a rouge, a druid for a healer and myself, the ranger. The funny thing is that the druid is a terrible druid and healer. So the tank is also the healer or myself XD

[@BaceJeleren]

The atheist thing makes no sense whatsoever. It's a game.

[@ellagrant6190]

He is an idiot and I say that as an atheist. Firstly it's a game, as you say. It doesn't mean anything in real life and my atheist non-gods don't care if I pretend to be a religious character. Secondly, most atheists are atheists because they are not convinced by the evidence. In a world with magic and real verifiable miracles, contact with outsiders and the afterlife, the same qualities which lead me to be an atheist in real life would lead me to be a believer in Faerun. I can understand if a character doesn't like the gods for multiple reasons, basically the stereotypical atheist but in this case they don't deny they exist, they just deny that they have a useful or positive influence. Like you said, it makes no sense.

[@BaceJeleren]

Exactly, there are actually proven gods within the game. I get maybe having a character that doesn't like any of the gods and wants to become one himself, but having an atheist character in a world where you can physically fight gods is pretty ignorant.

[@Ristaak]

Well I don't know about dnd 5th edition, but in Pathfinder atheists exist, but they aren't described as people who don't believe in gods (they certainly believe in gods, theirs no doubt about that) but they deny that the gods are good for the multiverse, they seek to live without their influence. In the pathfinder universe being an atheist is a very bad thing, as they don't get accepted into any of the salvations or damnations, and Pharasma just has them burn in a coffin for all eternity so they can regret their choice. I think it's quite flavorful and as an atheist in real life myself I think it's cool, but I again I dont' know how it works in dnd 5th edition lore so yah.

[@JainZar1]

Ristaak Laurien In Faerun you got absorbed into a magic wall of souls, that burns your essence to guard the city of the god of death against demon attack. I don't know how Greyhawk works though.

[@violetsapphire952]

Me: Atheist who believes in peace, kindness, acceptance and use of minimum nescesarry force wherever nonviolence is no longer an option. Enjoys playing piety and zeal paladins and cleansing the unbeliever with holy fire. Why? Because the POINT of an RPG is to play a character who is not you. It's fun. That's why we do it.

[@erggml1887]

I understand why people try to replicate their favorite characters (Lan, Drizzt etc). I like them too, but, it's never as good in game. And I feel that the player is usually more interesting and fun when they make a character of their own, even if it's very similar to a literary figure. So, I never play literary clones myself. I won't take issue with others who do this however.

[@brennangray8712]

me neither unless I'm simply attempting to make them into a character, but even then I usually don't play them

[@absolstoryoffiction6615]

I only Point Buy for my characters. It's the only way to be consistent for anything I do. Especially when rolling points has a chance of forcing you to play another class by then... Not fun, when RNG is involved with creation. I rather have RNG be the flavor of the campaign and not outside of the game.

[@noahwolff5455]

I refuse to play a human fighter cus I don't want people to think I'm... (whispers) basic.

[@Nerdarchy]

Lol, besides most of play at being human every day. Nerdarchist Dave

[@sweetrollcultists1317]

Fighter can be whatever you want it to be. like a noble, farmer, a dex fighter could be a spy with high sneak or if you choose the samurai subclass you can have high wisdom and charisma get the diplomat feat and have proficiency in an instrument then Bam your a non-magical bard. I will never understand why people think fighter is basic. But yeah humans are kind of basic but don't let that stop you from playing them if you want to

[@SindoriTV]

You could always play champion human fighter named Gen Eric

[@masterreaper115]

@@sweetrollcultists1317 because people see fighter and just fall into "Me fighter I attack alot i hit stuff me strong" and just stop even trying to be 3d about it

[@josephgeorge5741]

That's why you do variant human. What sets one apart more than having a free feat?

[@Santova12]

Played a chaotic good necromancer who used their powers to create an army of skeletons as a replacement for slave labor- why would you allow living people to be tormented and forced through such heinous crimes as slave labor, when you can get free labor that feels no pain or displeasure? Not necessarily a 100% good person, but he came from a place of wanting to improve the world, and just had an unorthodox way of doing it. One thing I'm surprised you guys didn't really touch on is having taboo personalities or backstories- not game mechanics you won't use, but people you don't want to play as. I always shy away from creating characters who have had a hand in things like rape or slave trading, stuff that's truly evil and reprehensible in my mind. A lot of crimes are still on the table- murder, theft, etc, but there are certain places I refuse go, and certain things that I will never do in a game, as mentioned above. Are there any similar taboos you guys have, for things you won't roleplay as, or actions you'll never take in a game?

[@PhyreI3ird]

And depending on how necromancy actually works, if it doesn't use/muddle with souls than that might be the only ethical way to hold a standing army or fight a war. Why cast away the lives of your people when you don't have any need to, especially since people could be more useful as tradesmen, merchants, administrators and the like during stressful times for a government. You also make a good point there too, it would've been kinda cool to see them go over taboo character types. For me basically the only thing (aside from what you mentioned) that'd be 'taboo' for me is obviously playing a character who's malicious or too apathetic to the party they're in, because unless that was part of the set up there's just *no* way that could come anywhere close to resembling fun. I suppose I would also have an issue playing an Enchantment caster that has the good alignment seeing as enchantment is about twisting a person or creature's free will and ability to decide, but there's wiggle-room on that.

[@KriegsMeister27]

Hey, the best part of that is that when your ex-slaves die, you can bring 'em back to work

[@VixenIcaza]

I have a CG halfling necromancer who has the following thought process. "Well if I was dead but could still help I would want to! Surely others would be the same! I am gonna let them help!!! Needless to say she has a wisdom dump stat.

[@evanhuizenga8626]

I find it strange that you find rape and slavery to be morally worse than murder...like, literally just killing someone in cold blood, ending their life, extinguishing them from the world, that's chill, but man if you didn't get that consent before sex, you better watch out... :P

[@evanhuizenga8626]

Well, I mean "justifiable" is subjective. A scientist could find it 'justifiable' to rape someone for research and knowledge. A cleric or inquisitor could find it 'justifiable' to rape someone because they're an enemy of their beliefs. If we're justifying things subjectively, I can come up with a million situations where it would be 'justifiable' to rape someone, just as much as there are 'justifiable' reasons to kill someone. At the end of the day though, killing someone is the ultimate expression of taking away their freedom; death is the permanant removal of agency. Raping someone only does that temporarily, and slavery as well.

[@DracosDiabolis]

we found a ring of 3 wishes once. lol with one charge left. and it really started to tear the party apart. all wanting that wish. So I took it apon myself to fix it. I got the ring and wished for nothing. just to blow the charge. I stunned the DM. I wished for nothing, and got nothing. wish granted. lol pissed off the party thou.

[@PhyreI3ird]

You should've wished "I wish nobody was upset about the last wish in the ring anymore.... or the user of the last wish" but eh, hindsight's a bitch x)

[@DracosDiabolis]

PhyreI3ird hindsight is 20/20

[@DracosDiabolis]

Grim reaper most of the players from my old gg. have no social lives. lol

[@bluefan898]

I hope that if my group ever gets a ring of wishes with any charges we use it to fix the wizard's Constitution or something like that. Use it to bring someone's worst stat up to max.

[@samuelbunkly2527]

I wish the ring recharged every time the ring changes owners.

[@willichtenstein7071]

I was in a one time session for a fallout like game. One of the players was intentionally ruining the game. So I brought an unofficial cards against humanity expansion (Crabs against humidity) , and role played a super mutant that found a deck of tarot cards. I made all my decisions by shuffling the cards and drawing from the decks. I ended up defeating a town and use intimidation to 'convert' the townsfolk to the church of raptor Jesus.

[@caseyhudson4929]

I wish the story ended by rounding up the newly converted and forming a lynch mob to hunt the character who tried ruining the game.

[@JoeSmith-ug9hu]

For me, a character has to have a backstory.. and not something that's just "My parents died, I'm on my own trying to find my way." I needs to have depth, because I just helps me flesh out my character and their ideals

[@ButtonMasherBros]

SO I just stumbled across your channel... I love it. You guy have great conversations and help me scratch that DND itch while I'm working. Keep up the good work guys!

[@kidd9]

Here's a weird one: I'll never play a character that flirts. Be it some degree of chastity, innocence, jading, or betrothal, none of my characters "take the bait" when a flirtatious situation pops up. That kind of role play always tends to be more cringe-worthy than it's worth! If it's some kind of compelled effect, like an encounter with a succubus that isn't going so well, then sure, I'll play along. But don't expect anything more than dice rolls out of me to resolve it :D

[@Capt.Thunder]

Yeah, that's a fair enough point. You essentially have to really trust your group if you're going to get into "romantic" or even weirder RP. You don't want to make other people at the table feel uncomfortable. It certainly shouldn't be the focus of your character's interactions, and any such allusions should be very brief and handled "offscreen" in skips.

[@violetsapphire952]

I do the same, not like... consciously, I just always end up making characters who are too busy for romance or see it as beneath them. Now I think about it, I should probably try to change that by intentionally making a flirtatious character, just to push the boundaries of my comfort zone a little.

[@kevinsullivan3448]

For me it really depends on how detiled the 'flirting' is and how detailed the relationship is. As a GM I've given player's characters love interests and as a player I've had charactesr with love interests involving both NPCs and other characters. I've had other player's characters initiate relationships with my characters and my characters have initiated relationships with other player's characters. It really is all about the level of explicite action that takes place in the game. I still have some blue books with conversations between one of my androginous' characters and another player's female character. It started out as the female character (relatively naïve) asking some questions about his anatomy. The relationship built up over about 3 months of game sessions and 6-8 months of game time and eventually they became a couple. But the level of explicitness was kept pg-rated. In another game one of my male tiger shape changer character was captured by a group female feline- villains who kept him for 2 months game time as a sex toy before the rest of the team broke him out. Aside from the statement thatmy character was used in this fashion, there was no 'character interaction' in game. It was also completely hilarious because my character was a horn dog. In that same game, the same characetr had a tragic love affair with another female feline villain that ended up changing the world. In a game I ran, the thief married the NPC cleric and the Paladin married a PC Cleric. That was pretty much it, other than the fact that the Cleric had once been a man and was affected by a Girlde of femininity/Masculinity...

[@Logan_Baron]

I've been that character with the "I roll to seduce the barmaid" and I still stick primarily to die rolls. I don't want to roleplay seducing my DM whether they are male or female. It was fun to watch on Community between Annie and Abed, and I got a laugh out of Laura Bailey on Critical Role saying she watched Matt Mercer flirt with her husband when they roleplayed Grog and the Nymph but it would be cringing to me to do so even when playing a character that does so.

[@paperaxes4192]

Personally, I love to lay on the flirt and then go for the ham sandwich. So, like tell the barmaid that she's beautiful, and that you love her hair and could she come sit with you guys, and then... try to recruit her as an informant on the evil baron you're trying to take down. Or try to set her up with the groom who is brushing your horses right now. Or try to sell her some hair product. Never play it straight up, always twist!

[@belgarath71]

The backstory of one of my characters was he had to fight a "good" necromancer. Basically, this individual had an unfortunate mind-breaking encounter with a good fey who "educated" this person on the virtues of friendship being forever. So, the character became a necromancer and went around raising the friends and family of people he met because "friendship is forever"... much to the dismay of said living friends and family. He thought he was doing good things.

[@Hebdomad7]

Benjamin Metcalfe :D this is exactly the kind of "good" necromancer I'd make. XD Absolutely terrifying.

[@weedle5221]

the atheist player needs to chill

[@nickyburns748]

Weedle, you're a truly underappreciated pokemon.

[@EmilyChuu]

Lmao truth

[@Svoorhout85]

The event they described reminded me of BA Baracus from the A team. Who was so afraid of flying that they had to knock him out and carry him into an airplane if they had to fly anywhere.

[@jrm48220]

He does, but he also has some good cause to be mad. Ignore what the bard made him do while charmed and simply look at the fact that another player effectively forced the atheist's character to do something that was both against his and his character's beliefs and wishes. Forcing another player's character do something the player and character both don't want to do is a real dick move.

[@justinthan2]

I agree it’s a dick move to force the character, but the player made the mistake of taking it off the characters and to the players which is never okay.

[@SmittyWerbenjagermandragon]

my taboo is to make an OP character. I am a natural min/MAX-er, my first character that i made, was a halfling rogue an he was a beast at any thing dex related which was at 22.( i found a Manual of Quickness of Action) i had double prof in all dex skills plus i took the alert feat which gave me UNGODLY initiative. my DM was sooooo mad. there wasn't any way to find me(at the time i found this hilarious)and this was just at lvl 15. plus he was a halfling which made him lucky. on the rare chance that i crit failed i could re roll and go for the really big numbers if i got less than 10, i would just take 10 an thereby get 26 to my roll. another OP character i made was Krieg the Psycho. He was a barbarian that started at 20 STR, by the first ability score improvement, he had 20 CON and 16 DEX, he had some pitfalls like 8 WIS and 8 INT which made it funny to not even be able to find the enemies sometimes. I've learned my lesson. Now i try to make them as balanced as posible. right now im a bard of the college of lore. he is proficient at all INT skills but he doesnt have prof in INT saves. im trying to make him as supportive as possible (dangit i'm still min/max-ing)

[@JacksonOwex]

How do you have DOUBLE PROFICIENCY in skills?

[@anna-thealittek9662]

@@JacksonOwex expertise adds double your prof. bonus

[@Jan_Nicolaisen]

I tend to lean min/max-y as well, but I find that starting with the concept, fleshing out the character, and _then_ optimizing the skillset for that concept makes for better RP and more balance.

[@Jan_Nicolaisen]

@@JacksonOwex Expertise, gives you double your proficiency bonus to those skills.

[@mcnugget2525]

My only taboo is I don't play a loner. It can work I'm sure but I feel like it's more fun for everyone if all the characters quickly buy in to the party.

[@AndrewFullerton]

Taboo for me: characters that are nothing but stat blocks. If I can't describe a character beyond class, race, and attributes, I won't play it. Even if it's just a one-shot, I like there to be SOMETHING of a personality, or at the very least distinguishing traits/quirks.

[@felniiriisk8863]

Andrew Fulllerton Why not try FATE? That bases characters off of qualities and assumes they are good at what they do while forcing them to have some kind of downside. Eg. A thief could be good at stealing but can't not steal EVERYTHING no matter who it belongs to.

[@kevinsullivan3448]

Because Fate is for people who are to full of themselves to play a reral game. Like Amber Diceless and pretty much all World of Lameness games.

[@ironcladguildhand9321]

All my characters start as a cool idea I just tack a stat block that works well. Fun ideas and functional ways to play the game all need a good story to go with them.

[@Kartissa]

*Kevin Sullivan* Out of curiosity, what do you consider to be a 'real' game? Because that's the second time I've seen you make that reference on the comments for this video, and I'm only skimming.

[@paperaxes4192]

When people come to me for help with character creation, I ask them about CHARACTER and for some reason they're baffled by the question. How can they roleplay someone if they don't know who they are? I've never read a script or a play where it was explicitly stated how tall or heavy anyone was or listed out their con scores.

[@LordDragonFTW]

As an Atheist I actually have always really liked playing the devout religious classes like Paladins.

[@EmilyChuu]

Is that fucking skull servants

[@LordDragonFTW]

The Discord yes, yes it is

[@isaaclota2265]

King of the Skull Servants by god my king has cometh. -draws 3 Wight Princes-

[@lauravturner]

Same.

[@jnorthey9]

my biggest taboo in character creating is not actually doing ideals and character traits, because it really annoys me when people don't at least try to roleplay. Idc if you are bad at roleplaying just try at all

[@cicadasigil9471]

My favorite method of playing a "good" or "less than evil" Necromancer is to do a coroner/detective type of thing where you mostly animate the dead to solve a crime through victim statements, while occasionally animating the "bad guys" to fight their friends. lends itself to a Pushing Daisy's play style too (innocent natural necromancer)

[@justanormalcat1839]

Me: Yo DM can I have the power to stop time? DM: No, you can't... Me: Can I have the power to use Za Warudo. DM: WRRRYYY Me: WRRYYYYY

[@GreatDerg]

i dont think this one is a normal cat

[@GallowglassAxe]

I like the irony. We can have evil paladins but not good necromancers. As for the whole necrotic damage then I guess monks who use the quivering palm are evil too.

[@dualitydisorder]

thank you

[@davidweihe6052]

Well, the Chinese guy (Pai Mei) in Kill Bill: Vol. 2 certainly was, even if a good teacher for Bill and The Bride. Putting out Daryl Hannah's eye was certainly not a "good" act, even if she was evil, herself.

[@GallowglassAxe]

@Confusing Zark: That doesn't make sense. Paladins and Clerics get their power from a higher power (Well paladins can get it from a cause or code but whatever) and they are attach to the good and evil of the universe. Nerdarchy and DnD have shown that they can have evil clerics and evil paladins. Nerdarchy even tried to make an evil Oath of Redemption Paladin. Wizards are tied to the arcane and have no ties to the good and evil. Using necrotic damage is no different then burning them alive with a fireball or disemboweling them with longsword. How you use that ability depends on whether you are good or evil.

[@legiongames3509]

Confusing Zark In 5e I believe it talks about Necromancy not being inherently evil. In fact spells such as spare the dying are from the school of Necromancy. In dnd they've made it pretty clear that necromancer aren't evil. When they raise the undead, they don't even trap a soul or anything into the corpse, it just animates the corpse with necrotic energy, much like the animate object spell. Necromancy is a totally neutral school of magic.

[@jonathanstern5537]

A friend of mine LARPed as a good necromancer.

[@Gursha88]

My taboo: If I'm playing a base/core class, I have to play against type. The party asked for a paladin and a paladin is what I made. The party however was not expecting a dominatrix.

[@neccodealer]

Gursha88 I love doing that too! It’s fun to play off of

[@stoicmuse]

I like going against type, I have a Paladin, that is struggling with his past, and is a drunk (though he basically fights better drunk anyways, and has a still for making alcohol on the inside of his tower shield). me and my DM have been working on all the details, I can't wait to play him when we start a new campaign

[@ShadowWolfRising]

I like to in video games specifically make a Race and Character class (No Humans though, humans are boring.) that don't match. Because it amuses me.

[@snowman9631]

@@ShadowWolfRising humans are not boring, look at our own world were crazy, i fail to see how humans are boring, they dont get all the special bonuses other races get, playing a human is like rasing the difficulty slightly

[@ShadowWolfRising]

@@snowman9631 I am a human in real life, ergo they are boring. Why play a fantasy game if your just gonna pick the thing you are in real life?

[@christinebainbridge8774]

See, what I don't get is why people who don't like necromancy don't also raise a fuss about enchantment. If you're looking for slavery, it's the entire School of slavery...

[@elzipper716]

I read through the schools of magic and honestly Enchantment pissed me off more than Necromancy. At least Necromancy only enthralls the dead!

[@PhyreI3ird]

Cuz it has a pretty word attached to it >:/ Really, that's the only reason.

[@christinebainbridge8774]

Tsk. If the top enchanters had chosen an obviously evil name for their discipline, they wouldn't really be master enchanters then, would they?

[@Tenesfer]

If you think about it the evil classification rarely makes any sense. Little Timmy sure will be glad that the wizard that killed him used a fire spell instead of one that dealt necrotic damage. And Little Tommy willl sure be angry at the wizard that rotted the ogres face of who was about to eat him. Would be kinda neat to see this discussion happen in-game too. A necro being tired of the others being wary of him while another wizard continiously charms people and get celebrated.

[@richerdson3652]

It's that whole raising zombies thing at other undead nastys we as people have a natural aversion to death and dead things

[@littlemiho6208]

One rule, don't create a player to vent out your real life stress or butthurt. A player got dumped by his real life GF who cheated on him, so he created a character who hates women. No one in the group he had this hatred. So my character, a female, was always attacked with sniping each night. Finally near death, he raped my character. GM said no no no but decided to keep my character pregnant through divine means. The "sick" player in real life laughed and swelled with glee he got a rape session. Guys, if you invite women into your group, make sure the male players treat us women with respect in real life.

[@rpgincorporated8302]

Ouch. I'm sorry you went through that. I was wondering where you were going with that at first, because my first character was me dealing with real world drama. Not in the way you described, mind you; I felt I had majority messed things up recently, and I made a character whose similar mistake caused the destruction of his hometown and all loved ones: basically everything he'd ever known. He, like me, was intent on redemption. I was able to say things in character that I'd never say in person. I don't think I made anyone uncomfortable (people just saw me as passionate), and everyone at the table seemed to like my character.

[@dracophoenixttv]

I would not have a allowed that in any of my sessions I dont care about romance and all but rape is wrong and making a player hate a specific gender. There's no reason got that.

[@scottlemiere2024]

I would have walked away from the session and never talked to any of those players again.

[@Gyrbae]

Little Miho What the fuuuuuuuuck, that's a shitty session, both on the r/Niceguys and the DMs part

[@thereprehensible435]

Hate to be rude, but this sounds a bit unbelievable.

[@ankhi3585]

For Necromantic spells and good charactersyou can always make it a sorcerer/warlock that has them through bloodline/pact made by ancestors and see them as a curse, using them as a last resort or semi-involuntarely (a bit like Rogue from the X-Men).

[@Lesterioli]

To adress the necromancer taboo: Regarding necrotic energy, how is killing something using fire (which is an absolutely destructive element, by the way) innately better than killing something by disrupting their life force? I know next to nothing about 1st ed., but I don't think that argument is compelling . I have recently created a good necromancer character along with my GM. He is a necromancer wizard, but also the spiritual guide of his people. His backstory goes something like this: a necromancer was raising the dead on their burial grounds and began assaulting the village. My character and some warriors rushed to protect the folk and eventually managed to defeat the necromancer. When the last blow was being dealt at melee, the necromancer reached out his hand and touched my character's face. At that moment, a necklass worn by the necromancer began to levitate and vibrate, quickly snapping and finding its way to my character's neck. Turns out that the necklass wants to kill the wearer by causing your body to rot, and it really likes souls. Where the necromancer had touched my character's face is where the rotting began. Many souls of necromancers are trapped inside this necklass(I discussed with my GM the possibility that a greater being has created this necklass to farm some souls). While the necklass does grant necro powers, the rot can only be stopped by performing good deeds. The crux of it is: my character is good, does not wish to rot and die, and was also the spiritual guide of his people. He believes that the souls of evil people or creatures do not exit their bodies(normally) and that causes the spiritual and material plain to become unbalanced. But if he can raise the bodies of these evil creatures and use them for a good cause, then through good deeds(although forced) the soul can be cleased, and finally exit the body. To do this my character must be good himself, hence a good necromancer. He can only raise the evil dead, and only to perform good deeds, and that as a good deed to the spirits in itself. But that means he had to abbandon his village and begin a nomadic life in search of evil doers. I also used the rotting left side of his body to justify his deficient physical stats. He became somewhat obsessed with good deeds, really, and impulsively helps people - even if those people don't necessarily like or approve him and his methods..

[@draxthemsklonst]

Sounds like Anita Blake. Good necromancer, but no rot...her crutch is tied to being marked by an incubus (type of vampire in this story) so goes more sexual for recharge. Raises dead to solve crimes.

[@nkandas]

Rafael Bortoluzzi Massaiol that sounds like a compelling character.

[@EthelbertCoyote]

Good Necromancer example: A character who is a dealer in the knowledge of the dead, he/she doesn't normally raise the dead but works with them to right what they left long in the world in exchange for secrets of days past. He/she may raise them to hlep them achieve a task left undone, ) example dig a propper grave for thier family who died in a plauge for example. He/she would strive to help the dead live most restful lives rather than to force thier wills. He/She might earn a living finding out where Grandma left her wedding ring that was never found to give to the granddaughter as a wedding presant. All the while this person would be furthering their knowledge of necromancy through practice not dark ritual.

[@nachofilament294]

1:40 I've played with people of all kinds of religious beliefs - super Bible-thumping evangelicals, yarmulke -wearing Jews, both apathetic and serious Catholics, and an actual real-world druid. The only people I've played with that ever have a problem playing characters that worship something other than what they do in real life are the super militant atheists.

[@violetsapphire952]

As an atheist (but not a very militant one), I will apologise on their behalf. They seem not to have grasped the spirit of a "ROLE PLAYING game", in which you pretend to be someone else with contrary beliefs, ideals and motives. They ALSO seem to fail to have grasped the idea that in a high-fantasy setting, there is plenty of EVIDENCE for the existence of gods and that it would be denial of their existence, in such a world, which would be irrational. Since the whole point of atheism is supposed to be rationality, they're rather betraying their own belief system there...

[@aurourus6894]

There is nothing stopping you from playing yourself in the game dude. Also there are apparently "signs of god", in our world yet many people are not religious, huh how does that work?

[@violetsapphire952]

Because those signs are much less... well... blatant than your god literally turning up to fight battles for you, magically healing you and your allies and smiting your enemies with celestial fire.

[@aurourus6894]

How are these signs from god? Magic can exist without the help of gods, it's just as magical as life itself.

[@violetsapphire952]

This is absolutely true for things like cleric healing and magical casting and I play a lot in a campaign where this is all clerics can do and a lot of people are suspicious that they are just using magic, the same as wizards, however, things like petitioning your god for aid to have them manifest in front of you, or for them to send you an angel or a weapon, or to hear them speak to you and tell you information only they know... those are pretty solid evidence for the existence a conscious creature of considerable power.

[@alanschaub147]

The most fun that I have had with a character was playing a Goliath Barbarian. He was so well-loved by the party that the other players continue to use him as an NPC when they DM campaigns. He became a folk hero! 😊

[@cvernon5256]

In regards to the 'good necromancer,' I pull from the Abhorsen series by Garth Nix. It's more along the lines of using necromancy to place the Undead back in their graves. Problem is that most of it falls into things more akin to arcane force.

[@BarrengerFynar]

Any player threatening another player in my game...you done...gone...period. Its a game to have fun.

[@RisenRen]

I rolled up a monk with an 18 dex 16 wis and he nailed a 4 int it’s fucking hilarious to play

[@davidweihe6052]

How do you play him? Like Imagen Boo (and I've certainly botched the spelling) from Dragonball Z?

[@RisenRen]

David Weihe like i would a wild animal. He’s barely capable of speech i limit it to 4 based on his int score there. Can’t speak words more than 4 letters and no more than 4-5 words per sentence.

[@nachofilament294]

A low Int and a high Wis? What is that irl, like Forrest Gump?

[@RisenRen]

Nacho Filament wisdom isn’t dependent on int you don’t need to be smart to know when a threat is nearby or track people. It’s like a wild animal with those stats.

[@dylanhenderson5226]

Cleared his mind of all thoughts a little to well

[@incarnum13]

I have to wonder whats worse. An atheist who refuses to play a religious character because their atheist or a player who plays religious characters but always makes them the most overzealous moronic characters because of their persona of religious people. I have a friend who does the latter and i equate this to the player who always plays a dumb bimbo when he plays a chick.

[@budahbaba7856]

Well, perhaps the two problems have a similar core: lack of imagination. The former's lack of imagination may leave them unable to read the cosmos in no terms other than a coldly simplistic and superficially easy conclusion of "no God" that can brook no empathy to other points of view. The latter's lack of imagination leaves them unable to articulate or empathize a sense of Great Mystery in anything but club footed stereotypes -because they have not really sorted out their own self, or have connection with other souls who dwell there.

[@Darth_Insidious]

I kinda did that with my Mhurren. He was a brute, half orc fanatic of Grummsh with a life debt to a tiefling in the party. I really enjoyed playing up his sense of pride and had a fun time with him. He willingly put himself in front of a newly invented gun to test its strength, complained to peasant townsfolk about poor building construction, and ran with the teifling on his back when shit hit the fan, leaving the elf player to the wolves. I would like to play good aligned religious characters, but I guess I hadn't found the time and wanted to play what I felt like was a healthy and fun evil character. Though I was a bit of a pain for the elf player, being an orc n all.

[@zhoupact8567]

Well, I do not see anything wrong with being overzealous as the religious character. Its not like that would be something you would never see. And the characters you play are somewhat special to begin with. That they would take their fate really seriously would also not be strange if they really want to please their god. Even more so as said god is real, and the more devoted you are toward them, the more they may like you as your drives would probably line in with what your god would want. I also do not see the problem with playing a dumb bimbo. Why is that bad? It do not seem strange to want to play a character as a stereotype. Is being able to play that, not why they picked that character detail? As for the atheist. I can fully see room for such a character. Even if people use magic and such. That there are characters who think their powers come from gods. That would not have to make it the case. You may not agree that the gods you do meet qualify as gods for whatever reason. However the character would still probably have to be a bit realistic with it all. If they know there is a creature who decides over the sea, and there are rumors this creature do not like something or demand something in order to leave you alone. Its just strange and senseless not to comply with whatever ritual they ask of you. Even if just for the reason that you know these people fear the wrath of this creature. If you do not want to do it for you do not wish to bend to these creatures. Seeing them as evil and bad. Then you may just have to stay back. _______________________ Personally I like the idea of my warlock finding a way to be self sufficient. Basically becoming his own patron. Studying and recreating some of the pact boons himself by looking at how other warlocks have described their abilities. However that would have to work itself out somehow. Maybe a lot of the abilities would be put on delay for a while. Maybe I would first get the good stuff at level 6~10 rather than 3. Maybe as a result, when the character is building a clan, he himself could somehow become a patron of weaker warlocks. Or rather, normal people who would make a pact with him in order to become warlocks. Or at least warlock ish, they may not gain the full powers of one as the power they are given comes form a weaker source. I suppose it would depend on my character. Making such a pact, giving a boon. That would probably come at a large cost. Say the character is level 10, the deal would have to cost and give less than if he would be 15. I imagine the same thing for both paladin and cleric class. You may not be praised as a god, but if you could make your clan become a symbol of hope or whatever. Maybe you could in a sense, gain fate points. And that way gift power for people to become your clerics or paladins. This too I think would come with costs to yourself naturally. And again, you are not a god. So the benefits would be weaker. Say the followers could only get to level 10. Or you would reduce their gain. For example a the warlock may only get a 2nd Eldritch Invocation instead of a 3rd. It is worth noting. You may not be a god. But while it may seem impossible for a character to grant such powers. Keep in mind, you would be granting such powers to a very limited amount of people. The gods probably grant their powers to many thousands of people. While it may seem you are doing the same thing, and therefore the power difference should make it impossible. It seems to me, you are really trying to do something far, far smaller despite trying for the same result. Like the difference between growing a tomato plant, compared to growing a whole massive farm of tomato plants. You may need godly resources to make a whole farm, but a 1 or a few plants? That may be possible. __________"What was it that we where talking about again?" as I wake up from toying around in my own mind, drooling a little.

[@C0ldIron]

Second one reminds me of how one of the voices in neverwinter knights 2. It was full on southern televangelists. As a cristian I found it amusing.

[@p45yourfired3]

Im playing a halfling grave domain cleric with -2 charisma playing him creepy as hell like inappropriate invasion of personal space when healing and always appearing over peoples shoulders its hilarious

[@coreyhodge1798]

How does the halfling get over someone's shoulder?

[@kylestanley7843]

@@coreyhodge1798 they float

[@danielwhitmee8256]

As far as a "good" Necromancer I think the Anita Black novels have a pretty good concept. The main character reanimates the dead as a private investigator/police consultant for evidence gathering and the like. Also as some interesting implications around necromancy and vampires.

[@TheZalirae]

I have a lawful good necromancer. the culture he comes from worship their fallen heroes and the necromancers act as a conduit between the living and they dead "requesting" the aid of the great heroes of the past to defend the land once more. so raise dead "in our game" brings mighty heroes temporarily back to the mortal realm. he fellows the teachings and customs of his people and uses his power to protect them. Im not trying to change minds but i think to be so firm the necromsncers that raise dead cant be good aligned really prevents people from exploring the different aspects of the system and making some truely amazing characters.

[@BimdoeDoll]

TheZalirae I always really wanted to run a necromancer like that

[@kevinsullivan3448]

Not THAT is how you fix the stupidity surrounding 'evil' necromancers. You use the game world to make them good guys, just like any good GM would. Only the intellectually bankrupt are unable to do this and only the emotionally bankrupt will argue about it.

[@kcrb0202]

Love this

[@DougVehovec]

Right there with them. I'll play any sort of character. It's fun to imagine worlds through different eyes. Low stats are definitely a great help defining a character too. One of my favorite characters is a medium Intelligence, low Wisdom, high Charisma wizard. We rolled stats (usually i prefer standard array) and i was happy to get more than one below 10.

[@duckdictator6531]

My necromancer type is more like a medical researcher who doesn’t have so many boundaries. Beric Mullindor will cure death!

[@pygmytyrantking3153]

GorumGamer That's what I'm doing with my necromancer as well

[@quintoncraig9299]

You can't cure death, you can try, and you will fail, not even the gods are spared this truth, death will come for them, and they will die, the only way to survive is to befriend death, or have enough methods of cheating her that she can't hold you for long. (a phylactery for example [multiple if you can)

[@quintoncraig9299]

Sorry about that, My character took over for a bit there, He is right though, nothing is eternal.

[@Kertezium]

Not with that kinda attitude you won't. Let's go kill Death itself. If it has stats it can die! :)

[@quintoncraig9299]

+Kertezium You can't kill death (for long) and even if you do, it's still possible to die without her presence. (She shows up in places where a lot of death is about to occur, mostly so that she doesn't have to travel there later with all that soul interference.) [and to top it all off, she has time travel-Sorta, she will re-spawn at the exact moment she died, effectively canceling her own death; this effect applies to the whole guild.]

[@damimcute1]

Most fun I ever had was playing a dwarf, with minimum int. I just did the first thing that came to mind in any given situation. Seemed to add a complete random element to the game and was a great time! Oh, he wore super heavy armor and was terrified of water too.

[@schliemann8293]

I'll do most things. I've dumped every stat as low as 8 (most to 7 and once, DEX to 5 for my heavyweight fighter, Jonathan "Greatjon" Asher). I never forgo all three mental stats, though. Even my Fighters and Barbarians will usually have a 14 somewhere.

[@aureliomanalo]

I wouldn't allow anyone threatening physical violence at my table, that's bullshit. I come to play a game, not be on the fucking Springer show.

[@Logan_Baron]

And if you can't separate character in game actions from the person. I mean sure sometimes character actions are the players being a jerk, but threatening the Player with bodily harm over "If you ever do that again" for a fictional character's actions in game. Just Damn, you got some issues.

[@TalonSky]

I have a really hard time playing truly monstrous races. Like, Goliaths and Tieflings are fine. But when it comes to Lizardfolk or even Dragonborn, I just cannot take them seriously enough. Also, any cat race in my world will inevitably just be Khajiit. Khajiit cannot avoid this, even for coin.

[@TheHobgoblyn]

What about those that are mostly human, just a bit more beastial and from a cruel or savage society like Orcs, Hobgoblins or Drow?

[@TalonSky]

TheHobgoblyn I've been able to get into those before. Somewhat. Drow aren't especially hard to play.

[@kevinsullivan3448]

I think less human races are not developed as much. If they have an integral place in the world, even 'monster' races like Orcs and Goblins can just be people. The limitation is on the GMs and players whon lack the ability to see them as anything except 'funny animals' like they see in cartoons. Also, the game writers have a big effect on this. Just look at Palladiium Fantasy where Ogres are treated as just like other people in some communities. No race should be 'inherently evil', that's just stupid and lazy on the part of the writers.

[@TheHobgoblyn]

Well, they are really all just humans in a way. Generally humans that adhere to a generally narrow stereotype. Often they are humans with altered or extra body parts that don't naturally occur in the human species. Maybe they have some supernatural abilities. Maybe they are specialized to live comfortably in a climate that humans generally struggle to exist in. They are maybe humans that universally embody certain traits that humans sometimes possess or traits we would associate with certain animals even if those traits are primarily originate from humans. They might be exaggerations of how we tend to view certain other cultures, generally derived only from one particular section of that culture. Or they might be how we view certain kinds of alien cultures in general. I think that is sort of necessary-- if they were so expansive in concept as to rival humans, they would also be so broad in concept that there would really be nothing specific one could say about them because some number of them would defy that description. Any single community of a race would have to have members that fulfill all the various roles necessary for the group to continue to thrive and develop and make and build all of what they are depicted as having. And the life experience that caused them to take on a role in their society and the experiences they would have living that life would wildly alter them. One can certainly surmise that both Orcs and Gnomes would likely have shepards who tend to animal herds that are used for wool, milk, food, etc.-- and those two shepards might have far more in common due to their experiences than the general standard concept of the singular personality and values and attitude that is always used as the template for them. And that is not even getting into how different groups of the same race would differ wildly. Certainly the way that the races in D&D world seem to be scattered along the D&D worlds, but also mixed in together so that any single group of that race is likely closer neighbors with groups of other races than other groups of their own race and have been for hundreds of years... that would completely undermine the kind of strong universal cultural traits that tend to be assigned to them. And certainly the "monster" races are the most badly developed. They were clearly initially conceptualized as nothing more than different shaped HP bags that adventures would need to destroy in order to get to the shiny loot inside and would and would appear just absolutely randomly as soon as adventurers opened the door to a room and only then would poof into existence without any rhyme or reason for where they came from or what they were doing there. The only reason there even are so many is that while it was a core concept that humans would gain experience and grow and become better... that was somehow inconceivable with the monsters, having one be stronger would imply that they had experience and a journey prior to popping out of no where in the middle of a dungeon with the singular goal of trying to kill the PCs before dying. Although subsequent editions have tried to do more with the concept, it has been rather stilted and stuttering due to the fact that the fundamental purpose has to just be to give PCs an opponent with slightly different or expanded stats and abilities than the normal bog-standard default they have been popping up until this point... or, alternatively, just giving a general idea of how a dedicated lair to them ought to be set up and some weak justification for the treasure the PCs get from killing them. Anyway, humans suck at explaining how other cultures differ from their own. So it isn't surprising when humans come up with something entirely fictional that it comes across as even more unrealistic, lacking nuisance and generally wonky even when they put in a heroic effort to try to bring them to life. And the ideas for peoples that they don't even really try to develop? Well, naturally those are going to be the worst. You can see how WarCraft moved Orcs from that bottom tier to the mid tier being perhaps the first series to really fully realize and develop them because story had to be told from their perspective and that meant that one would need to encounter a variety of distinct personalities among them and their ambitions and motivations had to be comprehendable and at least somewhat sympathetic as opposed to being well-- completely non-existent. I think if one did try to depict all these races that have been inhabiting the same land all scrambled up the way they typically are and have been so for millenia... well, there would be so little one could say about a race that it basically wouldn't matter at all beyond their general physical size and whatever unusual capabilities they might have. Otherwise they could be and act as any possible human could, so there would be nothing in particular you could surmise by their race.

[@kevinsullivan3448]

In my games in the last 20 years I have winnowed out many of the monster 'races' so that the fewer number of races can be more distinct in the world. Where they came from, what their culture says about them, how they susvive when not raiding others, etc. Most of the cringe-worthiness of non-human races like dragonbourn comes from how the player plays the character, as an individual with desires and life goals or the characature that they have in their mind because they can't be bothered to actually learn about that races place in the world? I've seen it happen both ways, in many games. I also like the term "Different shaped HP Bags" because for the first 10 years of D&D/AD&D that was pretty much all anything in the Monster Manual was, even if they were human brigands.

[@TwiddleFingersDB]

Don't make a Chaotic Good Drow Ranger.

[@NiminaeOld]

I feel like I play most people's taboo: a melee character with a constitution of 6. Let's just say I use a lot of Ki to dodge.

[@mayhewstorm1473]

Sounds like the atheist player was a crybaby. I don’t believe in any god in our world either, doesn’t mean I spit on players who choose the cleric. Hell one of my favorite 4e classes was Paladin.

[@thegitgudneighborhood]

I make a personality and make a character around it, which means I've been everything from a Half-Orc who wants to open a flower shop to a Dragonborn who strove to become wealthy to enable his mother to live an easy life as well as achieve his life-long dream of becoming fat. The only real "taboo" I'd say I have is that I never expect anyone nor want to be restricted by any preexisting notion that a character/creature should act a certain way just because it's written in any of the official material. ("Oh, a Tiefling can't be from a well-respected family/Having an orc be into flowers doesn't make any sense") If you want your High Elf to be a disgusting slob who gets along better with goblins than his own race, that's fine. You wanna be an automaton who has to take guardianship of a child, that's cool too (I love players who ask for detrimental things like NPCs since it gives me extra methods of conflict). Don't ever be that guy (we all know that person) who goes,"Well, that doesn't make sense, goblins/gnolls/dwarves/kenku wouldn't act like that." Hey, man. You wanna be a vanilla character? Good on you, just don't make a fuss over anyone else wanting to have fun. (Oh, boy, what a rant) - Awsm Chimera

[@stripe1000]

The only "good" necromancy I have ever played was a chaotic neutral character that was the "use any tool to complete the job" type. He constantly tried to save the village and then had to run from the people he saved as they tried to lynch him. It made for a very humorous game. He just did not see the difference between killing the bad guy with a sword or a zombie......and there was no convincing him otherwise. The cleric of Tyre in the party was not a fan either.........LOL

[@itsnotmereally1]

I had an idea of a fallen cleric who was tricked into betraying his faith. He was struck down and killed by his church, only to be reincarnated by those that had tricked him. They had tricked him to make a tool of their evil plot to take down the church. His reincarnation by the dark powers charged him with the powers of a necromancer but his beliefs and trust in his original faith were still true. So he used his necromancy against the forces of darkness and supported the original church he could never be accepted back into. I'm a sucker for the tragic anti-hero.

[@ShinningDarkness]

I would play a good necromancer as thoigh he could summon the the wrath of some god weither it be by Fates tragic remorse or the wrath of the Earth itself and that god would push forth from the ash skeletons and from the earth the dead would rise up to tread upon anyone or anything that impeades or opposes his or her progregress, ideals, god, ect.

[@WolfmanXD]

In terms of necromancy, I like looking at it from the point of view of the diablo necromancer. They use their death magic to protect the balance between good and evil. They believe death is neutral. And using death magic is neutral. So if I were to do a necromancer it would likely be lawful neutral.

[@MerridianPrime]

(5:31) Dave, I agree. I have a half orc barbarian named Mugtug who I always dump int and wisdom because he is supposed to be a big dumb lovable dolt. He’s easily my favourite character that I’ve ever made and his adventures are nowhere near finished. Someday hel finish a campaign... someday...

[@gyrrakavian]

One of my coworkers is a death-to-gnomes type. So much so that in one of his homebrewed worlds goblins were "just gnomes in their natural state".

[@Nerdsammich]

My personal headcanon for gnomes is that they're willing to take ridiculous risks in the pursuit of knowledge because long ago, they did the smart thing and used magic to contact their gods and find out that when they die, they are reincarnated with a portion of the knowledge they carried in all of their previous lives. So they're okay with biting it in the course of an insane experiment that pushes the boundaries of what's thought possible, because they'll be back having learned from the experience.

[@paulcoy9060]

I think "Taboo" is a strong word, most of these posts are "Personal Preference".

[@SatanicDemiGod]

I'm an atheist, and when I first started I wouldn't do anything with religion. That was a year ago and I just stared playing a cleric that is completely devoted to her God. I'm making myself play outside of my personal comfort zone

[@greenmann1217]

That's so weird to me. In D&D Gods are real tangible beings, it would seem to me a perfect opportunity to have fun as a believer.

[@MysticVRB]

That's something that has always baffled me. I am an atheist, I have never questioned that atheism cannot exist in a fantasy world. In our world works of fiction don't come off the written page so we disbelieve in anything that has no substantial reason to be believed. In a fantasy world like those presented in D&D the gods manifest themselves and walk the mortal plane, there is nothing to disbelieve, they show themselves, they interact with mortals and their lives. You can be non-religious in that you don't follow the doctrines or teachings of a religion, but you cannot be atheist.

[@violetsapphire952]

Tim Brown Unless, of course, in your DM's setting the gods have not manifested themselves in living memory and the only evidence of their power is the magic of the Clerics and the Paladins. Because, of course, in D&D, wizards exist too, once you accept that wizards can do magic without a god using a power that comes only from them, you might question "is that what Clerics are doing too, without realising it?" In a world where magic is just another form of technology, the spellcasting of the holy becomes a lot less tangible evidence, unless the gods themselves pay frequent visits to the world to check up on this. In that kind of setting, yes, atheism makes no sense.

[@greenmann1217]

Of course there are examples of settings where things are such as your example. However I am referring specifically to Forgotten Realms & Golarion.

[@Nok_Sul]

+Tim Brown For some people, isn't part of atheism the rejection of gods? Even if they did exist, then said atheists would not follow them, worship them, etc, etc. In that way you could have an atheist character.

[@Roka_Rolls]

To your guys question of roleplay taboos: I would be incredibly apprehensive to play a character built for one style of play in a theme that seemingly runs counter to that. Mostly because opening gateways to new, unexplored worlds and dropping an unfit character in the middle of it would get them unalived by whatever dangers lie in wait there.

[@Mister-Thirteen]

"If the corpse is merely a thing now" For the same reason you don't just build a statue and cast animate object in favor of making a true Golem. Necromancy in D&D is very metaphysics dependent; in some settings its an amoral act that often either breaks taboos or has other nasty effects. In others however the act is rooted in the manipulation of the soul.

[@MrSidonis]

My characters will always be from a fairly mundane background. Like a baker or a teacher. I refuse to make someone extraordinary who's destined for greatness. Like a dwarf who has high strength because they swing a pick in the mines all day, and so they use a war pick to fight. Not a fallen Aasimar who was trained by Asmodeus since birth because their half-angel half-devil mother placed them at his doorstep to learn about the suffering of others. So they dual wield a sword forged in the fire of hell and a katana blessed by the light of heaven. I just think its more compelling to play as someone who didn't have to be a hero, but became one through their actions. Rather than someone who is already great becoming great because they were fated to become great..

[@haydenfrost988]

I guess were total opposites. I really cant bring myself to play the average man character. I fall hard for the "You are an instrument of fate, this path is why you were created, this foe your perfect opposite." character type. My first character was Valen the son of a Knight who deserted his order and the mortal incarnation of the goddess Elohnna. Who took up the halberd to become a balancing force between the Natural world and Industrial Expansion. My second was Caerwyn, the grandson of the Ancient Silver Dragon who saved the kingdom centuries ago becoming a national hero. Caerwyn's journey was to become a man worthy of his grandfathers legacy, while also finding a way to the underworld to reclaim the soul of his wife. I am about to play a son of a Knightly family who is born under a fated star but is frail and sickly and so is unable to take up his families mantle. And who eventually meets a young Fey Maiden who he grows up with, eventually in their teenage years he swears a Knights oath to her and becomes an "Arcane Knight" (Warlock). I also have a stuck up aggressive and bratty "barbarian" prince character concept who's entire character arc would be a journey of self discovery and growth to eventually calm down his angry tendencies and become a man worthy of respect and of ruling his kingdom. The average Joe just never feels like enough to me. But i grew up with fables and fairytales full of Fated Holy Warriors chosen by the gods themselves to do a righteous task upon earth. You definately do have some that go overboard but if the group is cool with it then more power to them. (Also dont diss the katana, just like with everything else you have people that go too far with things but just wanting a Katana shouldnt be an issue.)

[@thewhispererindarkness9117]

John Burkett Then if you ever play rpgs besides D&D you might like Call of Cthulhu. In that almost all the careers you can pick are normal jobs and there are a lot of them.

[@BigBadWolframio]

Yassss!

[@tristanbuckner1170]

I’m a little bit of both to be honest. Sometimes it’s fun to be someone who is already kind of powerful. In one game I played as an archer that managed to escape the massacre of the kingdom he was from, and was being hunted down by bounty hunters. On the other hand, in another campaign (this was a science fiction one) I just played as a dime-a-dozen combat android. That character was fun to play, as I got to slowly evolve from being just some random soldier to actually being woman that people essentially pissed their pants when they saw.

[@Nerdsammich]

My next character is going to be a minor noble, but it's a cash-poor border barony and my dude is the second son, so he doesn't stand to inherit anyway. It's really only justification for him to be a knight-type, and so he can work toward starting his own mercenary company named the Second Sons, which sounds badass.

[@jonathanstern5537]

I'm an atheist, and my favorite character worshipped a celestial paragon. He was a bard/favored soul/sublime chord who achieved sainthood by rescuing an elven woman from Did.

[@jonathanstern5537]

Dis

[@PurpleAlzir]

I would imagine a hero who will do anything to ensure the greater good happens might delve into raising the dead necromancy if it can save more of the living or the world. Would definitely not be lawful though. Might fall into the Anti Hero category at some point though.

[@padalan2504]

How is necromancy not lawful? you force the dead into following orders, you can't get more lawful than that. Plus skeletons do not degrade, they stay in their form, forever, no chaos, no biology, no desire, nothing.

[@PurpleAlzir]

That is a good point actually. I was thinking too hard on the law abiding lawful good which a lot of places probably outlaw necromancy if it does involve trapping a soul eternally.

[@evanhuizenga8626]

That really depends on the purpose of raising the dead. Are you raising the dead for the purpose of upholding societal order, or tearing it down? Necromancy to create a labor force, for example, or to defend some location, would certainly be lawful. Necromancy to siege and torch a city? Probably more chaotic. Then again, I tend to look more at intent than action when I determine alignment-based things.

[@padalan2504]

Evan Huizenga How about undead devil and demon hunters?

[@evanhuizenga8626]

You mean an necromancer that *is* a devil and demon hunter? I mean...why are they hunting devils and demons? To protect humanity, or to steal their power for themselves? Like I said, intent matters more than action.

[@backlash660]

When Dave mentioned that he has fun playing a dumb character it reminded me of a character one of my friends played many years ago . He was a fighter who was as dumb as a bag of rocks , one of the other PC,s was trying to teach him throwing weapons . He gave him a rock and told him he wanted him to hit the boulder with it . The fighter said OK and took the rock walked over to the boulder and hit it , the rest of the group roared with laughter . If played well dumb characters are a blast .

[@siddharthbianchi9322]

Unless you are wizard,Eldritch Knight, or arcane trickster intelligence is the best stat to dump

[@brennangray8712]

Yep

[@DeathsHood]

As an atheist who has made a few religious characters, I've never actually thought about making an atheist character... I'm imagining someone who knows 'the gods' exist, but steadfastly refuses to acknowledge that they're gods. "Gods? Nonsense, they are simply spellcasters who have attained incredible power. Would you worship a wizard? You would? Why do I associate with you?"

[@Gamebuster1990]

I think a wizard who has attained incredible power and a god are pretty much the same thing.

[@DeathsHood]

Gamebuster1990 I dunno. A max level wizard wouldn't really stand up against a celestial being capable of thinking them out of existence... or punting them into their constituent particles...

[@cryofist]

this is really clever and i might use this myself, thank you for the idea!!

[@DeathsHood]

cryofist Go for it, lol. Ought to be a fun campaign!

[@Gamebuster1990]

Sounds to me like it's just a very powerful banishment/disintegrate spell. You can become a god by obtaining the divine spark. Having a religious following grow so strong that it forces you to gain the divine spark is the most common way to obtain it. You can effectively kill a god by killing all of it's followers & books related to it's religion. The easiest method I can think of to pull this off is to destroy the followers' plane of existence(s).

[@Cryosite]

My taboo for character gen: never roll for anything in character generation. I won't even play in a game where others in the party do. If you're going to create a character, then you should have a good enough idea what you want to play to be able to make choices. Random rolls can never produce anything better than that. Let the actual gameplay past session 0 be the unexpected stuff. Character gen should be 100% intentional.

[@glasswolf2061]

I usually agree with you there on everything except stat rolls - I much prefer rolling for stats that point buy systems. But sometimes - SOMETIMES - I will make a character who is entirely randomly generated JUST for the challenge of coming up with a backstory for the random ass shit that will be produced in that method, haha.

[@broceollomon]

I'm not a fan of playing an evil character that has no motivation to be evil. Some players have characters that do evil things for the sake of being evil. Stuff along the lines of "I'm going to murder this guy just because I want to commit murder, even though he hasn't provoked me in anyway". It isn't fun for me and breaks my immersion.

[@longp94]

Y'know, my interest in D&D causes youtube to constantly refer me to this channel and every time I check out a video, I'm constantly reminded of why I don't like the channel. Oftentimes there's a little bit of sage advice that comes out, such as say... role playing down is easier than role playing up. However, that's usually overshadowed by another inflexible statement that just reeks of antiquated ideas. Necromancy is defined in D&D as the power of death, unlife, and the life force. Why can't there be a Necromancer that views corpses as objects and be Good aligned? Is someone who creates a Golem evil? Do they trap a soul inside a shell and call it a golem? No, it's the creation of something that resembles life. This is the best explanation for the creation of non-intelligent undead as well. Golems aside, take a look at the spell, False Life, it proves that Necromancy can create something that resembles life. Looking at undead like zombies and skeletons, they aren't exactly self aware like a normal person, so why would you argue that there's a person's soul trapped in there? For creatures like Vampires and Ghosts, yeah, that's a person's soul, it retains a persona and self--awareness up to a point. This is not so with undead. To just disregard and idea merely because it goes against how you've always done things is a surefire way to kill creativity and critical thinking. What does people liking what you do even have to do with being good or evil? People wouldn't like you animating their loved ones as undead? Well people also wouldn't want their loved ones being killed because you decided to kill the evil despot whose family then went to war with the city you just liberated, does that make you evil? That random NPC soldier working for the evil despot had a wife and two kids, he just didn't want his family getting killed for choosing to ignore the draft, are you evil for killing him? The best advice for any situation, is to think things through critically and do some research. Keep your creativity flowing, don't get anchored down by antiquated traditions from players just because they've played for longer than you.

[@Madmoody21]

Generally I think immersion is why. Stories that are somewhat conceivable are more immersive. I know it sounds silly but in real life if some person raised your mother to fight for them be it good or bad you most likely would be quite upset, The mind follows the heart and logic. This game exists inside a real world. In my experience something that is seen and understood as so universally wrong in the real world cannot be put forth as a "good" thing it simply breaks immersion. Maybe it could be done with some real muscle but not by just the PC. This would take a very good DM allot of time working this idea into a believable scenario along with the PC. So Generally I know it is a bad idea for a player to make something so not fitting in the world that the DM must write around this players CHA. Maybe good for a book but not for the table.

[@notaprinny]

My taboo as a player and a gm is players not communicating what sort of characters they are building backstory wise. There is a good reason for this: I have a group of friends that I play with. We create our own worlds. The gm, which is either me or one other person in the group asks you things about your character to help you build it. The reason for this is to not break the taboo. The reason this taboo exists is that in our first game I specified that my character didn’t like members of a certain prominent family because a member of that family by the name of Shin murdered his entire village due to reasons that I let the gm determine for story reasons. One of the other players made a char named Shin from that family. We never communicated anything about our character sheets to each other or anything until we started. I had specified that my char had never seen the one who murdered his village. He just knew the name. The party introduced themselves one by one. We got to Shin. My character stabbed him in the face. Other player got p*ssed. I explained. He stayed angry for weeks and refused to talk to any of us. And before someone says ‘but why did you stab him, you knew he wasn’t the same Shin!’, yes, I knew that. My character didn’t. So that is why we communicate character backstory information with each other before we start. Didn’t stop that guy from making a character that my character would immediately hate in the next campaign though. I made a character that is very much a goody two shoes paladin kind of guy. The other guy made a pure evil character. Then got mad when he said ‘I roll to attack the villager’ and my immediate response was ‘I roll to disarm the one attacking the villager’. Yeah... suffice to say he has anger issues but not terrible anger issues. Just enough to ruin game nights.

[@Lukos0036]

I kind of like the idea of a necromancer played as a John Constantine or Sam & Dean Winchester type. Maybe a rough around the edges guy with a good core helping the dead tie up loose ends or coming to terms with their passage. Banishing demons and exorcising the possessed. Having ghosts in place of undead summons because they owed you one for helping them back when they did a thing and it helps them pass on.

[@ShadowWolfRising]

I thought up a character similar to that actually, a Duergar (Neutral Good) who is heavily influenced by the protagonist from 'The Exorcist. He's just a Dwarven Exorcist, but he can summon the dead, but tends not to most of the time.

[@Goblinerd]

Builds... My taboo is builds... just, no. Play a character, not a stat block.

[@pietrayday9915]

I can sympathize with that one, but it's gotten to be extremely against the grain of the general D&D community, and a severe imposition on their fun. The walking-talking-stat-block-builds frankensteined together from a thousand splatbooks was the reason I finally dropped out of D&D a few years ago: as a RPG character guy, I just don't fit into a build world anymore.

[@Goblinerd]

Yeah, I had a player who would make these flavorless stat blocks... he would pick races that gave him the stat bumps he wanted for his... build... and then give them retarded names and just play them as humans(well, himself basically)... Once he played a Dark elf sorcerer... called... Flekrad... Yeah, that's just Dark Elf spelled backwards...

[@theapprentice8204]

Goblinerd the only real reason I can't agree with this is because I have a tendency to do this on accident. Yes, I enjoy the roleplay aspect, and it's fun, but I also enjoy spending time making sure that whatever my character does, (s)he's the best at it

[@Goblinerd]

Dark Phoenix As do I, but there's a difference with showing up with a character that's well designed or, as you put it, the best at what he does and a stat block with no flavor. Have you ever had a player show up at the game with a PC called "Noname" or "Flekrad"(literally Dark elf backwards) because the player simply didn't care to put any further thought in his character past how much damage it can take/ how much it can avoid? How about a Pathfinder game where the very same player comes with a Monk who's race is so anthropomorphic animal with no name, this time because "He was raised in a monastery where they all made a vow of silence so they never named him"? When asked "If you were spent your entire life there and just left 2 weeks ago, how does your character even know how to speak common?" the player only shrugs uncomfortably because he didn't even think about it(and, tbh, he only just came up with an excuse as to why he doesn't have a name without any forethought...)... Not to mention the fact that he only picked that race because it had racial bonuses to Strength, and wisdom... Or how about the fact that they're almost always "Loners" because the player doesn't want to Roleplay his DPS stat block or tank or etc, so the player just sits there and waits for the next fight. God forbid there be no fight that session(which always leads to "I'm bored so I'm gonna pick a fight with any random NPC and kill it...). Oh, and btw, all those are the same player... So yeah... by all means maximize your character, so long as you come with an actual character, not a nameless stat block designed to do one thing, combat, and sit there doing nothing till it's time to kill something... Rant over, sorry lol

[@theapprentice8204]

ah, I see. My Brother is learning how to play, and he's... having difficulty differentiating. we're playing a bit more RP heavy than the "Kick down the Door" style he seems to think it is. so now he's got a rogue that's... backstabby and little else, but only because he's unaware of his own abilities non-combat uses. we're working on it, but yes, it is annoying to deal with for now.

[@mattysway4792]

Normally, my characters are not by any means “normal”. I am the type of person who will play a monstrous race as a good-aligned paladin, or make a gnome barbarian. In fact, the only time I ever played a human character was in Planescape. And even then, I’m pretty sure HE was the strangest one in that party.

[@EternalChairmanDev]

I like playing as a human looking warforged chick...

[@deadsailor79]

One of my favorites is a Gnome Barbarian/Druid... Good times!

[@anthonynovak4015]

thrikreen pugilist, just waiting for the actual campaign to start. already killed a bear and ate it in my intro session.

[@ChuckUFarley90]

I will never make a "STOOPID" character. Even my Minotaur Barbarian with an 8 Intelligence has a decent Wisdom, and he knows both WHEN and HOW to apply his Greatsword. He was almost always the first to charge into combat, and the few times he chose NOT to hit a bad guy, he ended up saving the party from certain death.

[@fl1735]

I want to have a step in on the good necromancer. A character concept I have right now is of a necromancer who does actually bring back the dead and such, but he mostly kinda stumbled into being a wizard, by being crazy smart and finding a spellbook from which he practised for hours on end, but he doesn't really have an idea of what is good and evil. He simply doesn't understand it. At which point, if there is no evil intent, is it really evil?

[@thepostman257]

isn't good necrotic just holy power?

[@kyubii972]

thepostman257 radiant is the holy power of 5e

[@thepostman257]

kyubii972 yea that

[@TrenchCoatDingo]

evil is what evil does. you make a army of undead to defeat a great demon lord im sure most ppl would be ok with it

[@iceberg54321]

You can raise animals as skeletons, no souls there,, at least by Earth-like Christian type religions, so saying souls are brought back as a mechanic is invalid or meaningless even to a good society. Also, you can accomplish life saving things with skeletons, from using cold skeletons to fight fires and store food for the winter in ice houses, or using fire skeletons to keep all the peasant families alive by putting an eternal fire in their stoves like a undead fire rat skeleton, or preventing arsenic poisoning from your tin mine, or prevent people from having to do backbreaking mindless labor, even stop meaningless wars because say chopping down woods that the Fey inhabit because you no longer need to burn wood. Not to mention the undead with a gong are far more adept as night sentries as they have darkvision, and never need sleep or get distracted, and so your village is far more likely to survive. Plus they can die for you in battle and you don't lose precious lives, and having undead makes people more valuable, and less likely to be killed, and live better lives, because they will produce more goods. Without the undead,, you would have a lesser chance of prospering or surviving then if you have them, thus it is far greater evil to not use them and let your people suffer because of morality issues that are at best... misplaced. - Necromancer Guild of the Greater Good.

[@TrenchCoatDingo]

*SLOW CLAPS*

[@immortalwolf3055]

making your character in the game atheist when you are an atheist in real life makes no sense to me, the game is about roleplaying. your character witnesses magic and gods and demi gods etc, sure they don't have to follow gods but we are not talking about our reality, more often than not we are talking high fantasy. the character is not the player, they need to get out of their head and put themselves in the place of the character and see that world the way the character would. i am in fact an atheist, i have no issue playing clerics and paladins etc. im not personally as interested in them as a character but i have no issue with them. i even played a cleric in a comical way as a dyed in the wool evangelist who is always trying to save people at each new town he came to. "have you accepted into your heart? have you received the message? it was annoyingly fun. i used the stereotypes to my advantage. as a final note i just want to say that you should get out of your comfort zone, you might even enjoy it. also, if a player wanted to hate on religion in the game cause they hate on religion irl i would simply not use healing spells on them, let them get their healing from a healers kit or die idc. in a certain campaign i simply claimed that their lack of faith obstructed my ability to heal them and left it at that.

[@ciarfah]

At most I would play a nonreligious character. But even as an atheist I enjoy playing religious classes

[@dracophoenixttv]

You know I am new to d&d and I am a Christian I dont care about putting in other gods a deity and having dark themes as I know it's just all fantasy honestly. You gotta just have fun with it is all.

[@thereprehensible435]

Psssst. RELIGION. Something disproven multiple times throughout history? Forces shown to explain reality? This is just a reversal of circumstances between religion and atheism. IMO, fella should have played an atheist not-zealot.

[@h-grid3137]

As atheist i love clerics and paladins in DnD, fact that gods doesnt exist doesnt mean that it whouldnt be cool if they did.

[@eWarriorDLC]

Same! I think the story and internal struggle for paladins and clerics can be really rewarding and worth exploring

[@TheAlmightyPillock]

I think mores the point that athiest does not apply in a D&D world where people KNOW the gods are real. They belive in god, they might jsut chose to to worship them. That is not an athiest.

[@AGrumpyPanda]

That's not what he means- he didn't say he *plays* atheists. I'm in a similar boat, I'm agnostic but I still get a kick out of playing divine casters because I know that in those worlds, the gods are well known and can actually walk up to you and say hi.

[@XSanctusMalumX]

The one way I can see a good necromancer working (thanks to Swtor) is if they ask permission from the dead to raise them. like they can ask a dead soldier if they will lend them their strength and fight to protect their home once more from a great evil, or offer a bandit a chance at redemption via undeath.

[@ravenstrahd5234]

As a DM, I let my players choose between the point buy method, the array method, or dice rolled stats. If they take the dice, they are held to whatever they roll. Back in 2e, we had a character that was rolled with nothing above 8. He got proficiency with pitchfork and torch and a d4 hit die. His class was just "Commoner" and he survived to 5th level before succumbing to death by lack of hit points.

[@destroyerinazuma96]

Interesting! I also would avoid a weak Dex, but not until I see the bigger picture. Easy examples some spellcaster classes don't need it that much, or I might be role playing a clumsy guy. Or picture a shell shocked veteran who has some issues but still vows to keep fighting. There's more to the character than DEX

[@destroyerinazuma96]

Yeah, even IRL there are many very intelligent people who either struggle to articulate their thoughts and/or use their intelligence properly. On the opposite someone with an average IQ but pro active, adaptable and hard working can be quite successful. Not that I want to get political, it's just fascinating to me in an almost ironical way.

[@kevinsullivan3448]

Gah, the last line should have read: A relatively avaerge Int character can still be a genius in one or two things. That is not so hard to Role Play.

[@lichofthewilds4384]

I don’t play short races. I have a slight complex about my height, so I like my character to be tall.

[@TheAlmightyPillock]

If I play a tall race, I play them max highet I can. If I play a small one, I play them as small as I can.

[@YourCrazyDolphin]

Ironically I'm a bit of the opposite: I _rarely_ play a tall character. Hell, I made several Kobolds. They can be as short as 2 feet. I myself am tall, I don't like being tall, looking down at thing really begins to hurt my neck. Now I can basically sit on the floor and just say it is because my character is short.

[@lichofthewilds4384]

We always want what we don't have.

[@TheAlmightyPillock]

Like Leprosy?

[@inigmianstudios2771]

My taboo is one of the worst ones i think. Homebrew, i always find a way to squeeze small bits of homebrew into my character. Weither its race, magic items or an intire class (that i make most of the time) Some good came out of it though. My Dragon Monk class became the basis for my Dungeons and Dragonballs campaign

[@barrybend7189]

Homebrew classes are fun like take sorcerer but go strictly transmutation but make only flesh altering spells.

[@cedarstreetmarket5699]

hey guys. just found your channel. love it! I'm in the middle of Kansas looking for DND people so tell that's found your discussions are awesomeness.

[@erianle123547]

In my current game, I'm playing a Cleric of the Raven Queen with the Graves domain. His primary role in the party is a healer/damage dealer, he can throw some serious nacrotic damage, but he apors the undead and anyone that would seek to desecrate the dead in any way. Before joining the group, he was a mortician and regularly served as a sort of counselor for those grieving a recent lost. In combat he feels like a necromancer, and out of combat he's creepy and death obsessed just like a necromancer, but in the long run he's more of a healer than anything else.