Atheist irl

Were=ye olde way of saying human.

>faggot irl
>posts faggot thread
Checks out.

...

Outside of the few facts that
>classes in rpg is terribly stupid and outdated concept that should die ages ago
>paladin is one of most stupid classes
I see no real reason why shouldn't i play a religious person, maybe even zealous, in a world where gods are proven to exist, as contrary to our own world.
Heck, even where gods aren't proven to exist, but the level of intellectual progression of the world is low enough for atheism to not be an common stance
Heck, even in worlds where atheism is common, like in modern settings, I really see no reson to play fucking catholic priest if I'd decide it would be interesting from story perspective. Because I'm not my character, kek.

...

I get it.

It's so stupid.

>baiter on Veeky Forums irl
>posts the same bait again
Uhm, no?

>not atheist irl
>plays a character with more than 8 INT

Uhm, no?

...

Just because I'm an atheist doesn't mean I can't entertain gods existing in fictional settings. You'd have to be a real jackass to be the type of person who can't even play pretend, whether you are saying "There are no Gods in this magical setting, I don't care what you say" or "There are no Gods but my own Gid in this magical setting, I don't care what you say"

I bet my IQ is at least a solid 20 digits higher than yours if not 40

>Paladin is a Cleric with a sword
Uhm, no?

>human irl
>troll on Veeky Forums

Uhm, no?

Your replying to very obvious bait does not reflect favourably on your intelligence.

>0+20 =20
You just played yourself

No it isn't simply atheism that is the problem and its perfectly reasonable for someone who doesn't believe in God or what have you to roleplay a paladin or something. It's the self-righteous ones that sound more like they are still angry at their conservative parents that are the problem.

Nobody has an IQ of 0

>20 digits
>IQ of 10,000,000,000,000,000,000

I think not.

This is a bait thread.
There is no telling the baiter from the baited.

Pretending to believe in a fictional god in a pretend setting is the same thing as actually believing in a real god.

I's the communicative property. That's just logic.

...

Maybe you're talking to a being of pure energy who has transcended spacetime

You don't know, it's user

It's called "commutative" and does not apply here in any way.

Right.
Silly me.

>atheist character
>has CHA above 8

archive.4plebs.org/tg/search/text/>atheist irl >plays a paladin/

OP, why did you change from the michelle obama pic?

What does the IQ of the average river rock weigh in as?

>no engineering degree irl
>plays technician

Uhm, no?

>Gods are real in fictional settings, says so right here in my DMG
>Gods are imaginary irl, says so right here in my common fucking sense

Uhm, yes.

...

Couldnt get over your last version of this thread being deleted?

Here, i'll just post the same thing I did in the last one.

10^(-42)

>same thread yesterday
Uhm, no?

>Lives in a city irl
>plays a druid

Uhm, no?

got any proof for that bold claim? surely you'd have some kind of evidence when making an assertion of that gravity coupled with indisputable evidence right? I mean nobody would legitimately argue that because they feel something doesn't exist then surely it doesn't without providing it doesn't exist.... That kind of narcissism is not fathomable. Good thing you have proof though

Uhm, no.

All players of the atheist background suffer debilitating penalties to str, dex, wis, cha and con exchanging mediocrity in those stats for an 8 int (below average intelligence) bestowed upon them by their patron deity Fedoran

>mfw this entire thread

>surely you'd have some kind of evidence when making an assertion of that gravity coupled with indisputable evidence right?
Either you typed this in a blind rage, or you're pretty illiterate.

Im phoneposting but keep it a secret

When it comes to the existence of an entity, you need positive proof of this entity's existence, usually along the lines of bones, bodies, or living specimens. Eye witness testimony is never good scientific evidence accept as a lead towards narrowing down possible looks and where it may exist to further search for it.

What you have stated is essentially the same thing as me claiming I have a dragon in my apartment and that you need to disprove this claim. It is literally impossible to do so.

However, absence of evidence, where there should be evidence, is evidence of absence. Gods, as far as the evidence shows currently, do not exist. No society or people has ever been able to back up the claims for their deities and the Christian one has been rendered more and more abstract as a means of escaping the ability to get any evidence.

>Absence of evidence =/= absence of subject

So cells didn't exist until 200 years ago?

Prove to me God doesn't exist and I'll recant my posts. The burden of proof lies with the contender and you are the first to contend that God doesn't exist so prove it

Can't prove a negative. Also, you contend that he DOES exist, to contend that he doesn't, someone must first contend that he does. Therefore, the burden of proof falls upon you.

We looked and he wasn't there.

>asking for proof that is literally outside the scope of anyone's means to provide

OK, m8. I'm not that user, but you're stirring the shit here for no reason, senpai.

Suffice it to say, the communicative property doesn't apply to works of fiction barring those written by authors writing some kind of tract.

And this demand for proof of God is retarded because if God definitively existed in a world where we had the means to prove it, greater minds than ours would've proven it by now.

>You
>Assumes to be smart enough to make an intelligent point

Uhm, no?

>OP irl
>not craving for cocks

Uhm, no?

Kinky

Until you can bring proof of something existing then anyone is well within their right to dismiss its existence
I mean, shit, do you read what you just wrote? Do you have any idea how much of a funhouse our perception of reality would be if we paid that rule as much attention as you are asking us to do?

>You can't live your life as if the Old Gods don't exist! Just because we have no evidence of their existence doesn't mean they don't really exist! What are you going to do if they dwell just outside of our current perception?

>not being an urban druid IRL

No, I just asked you to prove your intial premise with evidence that God doesn't exist. I never contended anything. This is what grown up's call "moving the goal posts".

If you can prove that God doesn't exist then I will concede that your premise is in fact truth because as it stands you have put forth no evidence to support it.

I can wait for you to compile all of your sources if that is what is causing the hold up

>atheist irl
>plays a fighter

It's called Formal Logic you high school cretin and it has existed longer than whatever country you're living in.

>The burden of proof lies with the contender
Indeed. So prove that any god exists.

I never contended anything though, he did by claiming God didn't exist and I simply asked him to prove it

If you're stalking for time to gather all of your sources to support your premise then I can wait, time really isn't a big deal for me so don't worry. Just worry about getting all of that evidence together okay?

Simple. In a scientific study of prayer to gauge its effects, what was found was that it had the exact opposite effect than what was expected if god was real.

In addition, Jesus clearly states within the Bible a simple test that can be used to verify whether god and faith really exists.

Mark 16:17-18
And these signs will accompany those who believe: In my name they will drive out demons; they will speak in new tongues;
they will pick up snakes with their hands; and when they drink deadly poison, it will not hurt them at all; they will place their hands on sick people, and they will get well."

Matthew 17:20
He replied, "Because you have so little faith. Truly I tell you, if you have faith as small as a mustard seed, you can say to this mountain, 'Move from here to there,' and it will move. Nothing will be impossible for you."

Mustard seeds are really fucking tiny.

Believers across the world are unable to do these things promised within the holy book for their religion which wrote down their gods wishes and teachings. This is evidence of absence. There is so much more. But you also need to show that this god actually exists as you have merely asserted its existence. Time to pony up your evidence.

>atheist
>playing anything besides Arcane Shitposter

>atheist irl
>plays a druid

Uhm, no?

That was me, completely different user to the one you were arguing with earlier.
I was simply pointing out that:

A) it is logically impossible to prove a negative, there is always somewhere you haven't looked.

B) to assert that something doesn't exist, somebody must first assert that said thing does exist.

Did you read the first post of that discussion?
The one theorizing somethings existence has the burden of proof.
So prove any gods existence. You have a couple of million gods to work with.

Is that in the Tome of Shitposting? I don't know this class.

Vecna is for real.

And which peer review journal published this finding that supports your assertion that these people drank poison and all died due to their faith exactly? I will need you to clarify because if no such empirical study was conducted then that is conjecture

>religious irl
>plays ttrpg
Uhm, no?

Checkmate, clerics

Happens more than you think

>not playing Dragonraid
baka desu senpai

Shitposters shitting on shitposters

>I never contended anything
You did, the absence of gods.

Why don't you stream yourself swallowing some cyanide? You'd make a contribution to humanity whatever the outcome.

It's from a 3.party source.
Enables you to play the Scat-o-mancer

We don't need a peer reviewed study for this as we have entire cults that practice these attempts of showing faith, and they have regular and often deaths due to snake bites and poison cocktails. We have plenty of easy to access information showing that these believers and a fuckton of other believers who dare not pick up snakes or drink poison are not protected by this god who said he would protect them.

There are two ways this can be read, he lied and thus is not a god worth worship, or he doesn't exist and cannot grant this protection. As there is no evidence to show his existence in any other way, yet plenty which reveals an absence in many and multiple ways beyond this, such as the entire enterprise of Science, he does not exist.

Now its time to prove your assertion of his existence via counter evidence.

Barely Related:
Reminds me of a bunch of comments I saw posted under an Acquisitions Inc. (PennyArcade Live DnD) video on YouTube. The bald guy who plays the cleric was talking about 3 of the party's NPC "interns" and he gave them biblical names... then turned to the audience and said "Sorry guys I'm a recovering christian"

In the comments, some butthurts were claiming that Christians are "persecuted in the gaming community"

>human irl
>plays an elf

Uhm, no?

>it is functionally impossible to prove a negative

This is flatly incorrect. In fact, that's actually a fallacy describing this exact response. It's okay though, you were unprepared. I'm sure you will come through with that evidence sooner or later.

On a serious note, could you count for me all those sweet, high fructose corn syrup atheist tears running down those pudgy cheeks of yours for me?

en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Philosophic_burden_of_proof

>thread gets deleted
>OP makes an identical one the next day
I admire your determination, user.

But those weren't conducted within any apparatus of empirical methodology so as it stands that is simply conjecture

>Speaking with rats, cats, dogs, cockroaches, spiders, bats, pidgeons, and other city denizens
>Being able to withstand the city's air and noise pollution
>Connect really well with people from all social strata
>Having a secret garden/bachelor pad in a ruined building
>Having an affinity for vehicles/electronics
>Helping stray kids find their mothers and wayward people their way home
>Using low-key magic to make your life comfortable and subtly helping other people from time to time
>Doing sick parkour to get around
>Using your powers to be a vigilante and to keep drug lords, organized crime, and corrupt people away from your city
>Telling the traditional druid that he can keep his forest
>That infiltrating the Trump tower as a rat to watch the skyline at night
>Making flowers bloom around lovey-doovey couples
>And watching people leave their jobs tired but satisfied that they'll get to see their loved ones when they make it home
>Holds as much beauty as the "untainted" wild
Sounds comfy

Why not? People irl already make crazy assumptions are religions, others and sometimes their own.

Playing a fake one in a RPG setting is clearly the next logical step.

Fedoras gonna fedora

>you cannot prove a negative
>statement is itself a negative
>literally negates itself

You're a fucking moron and anyone who taught you that you can't prove a negative is a moron

Give me Boolean algebra or go home

His best friend (sitting across the table from him) is very religious. It's just bantz.

Reminded that if you're a christian ttrpg player you're going to hell, better leave the hobby now and save your soul:

youtube.com/watch?v=wL7lEwD1uGI

Or, its a form of commonsense taught across multiple cultures that you don't mess with toxic plants or animals since they are will kill you, despite your faith. This is evidence that what was promised within the Bible is therefore wrong and points to his nonexistence. You can't get around this by trying to appeal to scientific evidence while conspicuously not providing your own scientific evidence showing his existence.

Incidentally, He also said it was possible to command a mountain to move and the mountain itself would get up and move. Also something that's never happened and thus more evidence of non existence. Its nice your going for the thing that is slightly more grounded, but you seem entirely ignorant of just how utterly debunked it is already.

If you want to trade in assertions, i'm perfectly willing to do so, but no one wins that debate.

Philosophical burden of proof is a neat trick to fool those who are not as beholden to good evidence. It also doesn't work when it comes to physical evidence and assertion of existent things as they must be proved by physical, and not theoretical or philosophical "evidence".

We get this thread every day