Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Beefment 07-11-05, 02:27 PM	To be fair, it was only a one-shot with a slight possibility of being continued into a full campaign, but even so! The party consists of a four ultra good guys and a TN hexblade. A recipe for disaster perhaps, but we thought we'd worked out some good reasoning for the hexblade's presence in the party. (He's the bodyguard of one of the other players who is the black sheep good son from a corrupt aristocratic family.) The players said they'd make it work, and I thought it was pretty cool. On the first adventure, they find themselves locked up in a slave ship with a bunch of gnomes and a human as fellow prisoners. Guards are nearby rummaging through the party's equipment. The party is split up between two cells with the hexblade (PC), celestial wizard (PC), gnome (NPC), and human (NPC) in one and everyone else in the other. All are unarmed. The hexblade decides to talk to the human NPC. He gets some general answers. When the hexblade starts asking about the human's and gnomes' backgrounds, the answer is basically "None of your business." So the hexblade begins to beat the snot out of the insolent, yet defenseless fellow prisoner. The LG wizard PC tries to stop his friend from the senseless violence only to have the hexblade punch him too. Long story short, the guards come to break up the fight and the other PCs cleverly kill two of them and catch the third in a choke hold. This last guard is nearly unconscious and clearly subdued. The party wants to keep him alive for info, but the guard begs for death and the hexblade decides to oblige against the will of the rest of the party. To prevent him from killing the guard, the wizard and sorcerer cast hold person on the hexblade. The guard is knocked unconscious and over the course of the adventure, the players find out they would've been screwed had they killed the last guard as the hexblade wanted. Still the hexblade is furious for being held "in combat" (remember that the only remaining threat was a grappled unarmed guard with 1 hp) and threatens to kill the spellcasters if they ever do something like that again. The player even seemed angry. Then he starts questioning the "goodness" of the rest of the party since they "murdered" the other two guards and magically restrained an ally. Whether he was role-playing or not got blurry and he offended one of the other players who he's been friends with for a while. Then the next day, the hexblade player apologizes for going crazy and claims the whole thing was part of his master plan for escaping the cells. Don't those kinds of plans usually involve telling the other party and starting a fake fight with an accomplice rather than a savage beating of an unwitting and defenseless NPC who's in the same straits as the party? So...yeah...I think we've actually got everything worked out between us now, but I'm curious what comments people have about it.
kaldrin 07-11-05, 02:35 PM	Sounds like he had a problem distinguishing himself and his character for a while there. He could have also had a very bad day. Cat died, got mugged, that sort of thing. I'd say one incident doesn't define a player or group, but if the behaviour continues I'd encourage him to find a new character. Hey, some players like conflict in a group because it somehow symbolizes more of a real role that comes up in life. But, this is a game. It's up to you as a DM to keep an eye on the situation. If it gets out of hand like that again he'll have to watch his back because the majority rules, as it were.
Gundragon 07-11-05, 02:36 PM	Sounds like the Hexblade was beeing disruptive on purpose. Beating up on PCs and NPCs without real provokeation doesnt seem like a master plan for escaping to me. Like you said, some indication to the players would have been nice. I'm just glad the matter seemed to get resolved in the end. Aside from that, the Hexblade seems to be a pretty interesting character. I find that parties with one "Maverick" character can be alot more fun to play with, as they are much less predictable.
Cymraegmorgan 07-11-05, 02:40 PM	If you get rid of him now, you will save your other players a whole lot of grief and wasted time. As soon as I even suspected the "roleplaying" was masking personal insults directed at another of my players, the hexblade player would have been asked to leave.
LCD2YOU 07-11-05, 02:43 PM	question the other characters, and players, about their goodness. Seems that the player of the hexblade likes carnage. Watch him. If he acts up again, suggest strongly that he play a different character if he feels his current character is perhaps, "Too forward thinking and acting". Then he can play a different character. If not, then perhaps the game as it stands may not be a good match for him. If he says that he wants his current character, then tell him that even though he has a concept in his mind, as much as the other characters will change, so to must his character's perceptions and actions. As for his charge of the others not acting in a "good" fashion, I don't agree. Killing those who are imprisoning you, and by that have no qulams imprisoning others, I'm going out on a limb here and thinking that the imprisonment was for some nefarious purpose, is actually a good thing to do. As for "holding an ally", the Hexblade has to act like one first. Second, stopping an "ally" from doing a foolish act is a very good thing to do.
AntiDjinn 07-11-05, 03:13 PM	The players said they'd make it work, and I thought it was pretty cool. Remind them of this commitment. You were all aware that the group's mix was potentially problematic, but the players agreed to make it work. If they do, then continue to be cool about how they work things out. If not, then junk it and start anew. The DM can do some things to ensure party harmony, but really this is an area where it is more on the players to just all get along.
celtredleg 07-11-05, 03:37 PM	Ask the hexblade how going out of control, and not working with the party is "making it work" If he reacts this way to every check on his behavior, then it not going to work. Have a pointed discusion with him. If he cant keep a cooperative image in his mind, then its just going to be an ongoing problem. It almost sounds like he wants to be CN or CE rather than TN. Ask him about that as well. He may claim to be TN, but when you talk to him it may well sound more CE. Some people think player on player fights are cool. Most dont. If you try to mix the two, you always have problems. Friends dont let friends play very different alignments.
celtredleg 07-11-05, 03:40 PM	That should be friends dont let friends play opposing alignments. LG-NG-CG-LN all seem to work togather just fine. TN should work with just about everybody, but I havent seen many play TN very well. Usually they turn much more chaotic than nuetral.
Light of Day 07-11-05, 04:09 PM	So, firstly the hexblade's char throws a hissy fit because some NPC talks back, then gets nasty when another player tries to break up his fight, then throws yet another fit when he gets restrained from finishing the fight his way? And to top it off, once he realises he was in the wrong, he makes up some BS excuse instead of appologising? Sounds like you have a control freak on your hands, and one who has difficulty admitting his own faults to boot. I bet he loves being centre of attention too, which is why he wants a character so vastly different from the others. He doesn't seem capable of handling it when a situation doesn't go "his way". Starting off imprisoned and missing his equipment is probably what set him off in the first place. I'd suggest keeping an eye on him. I doubt he's without reedeming qualities if he's a long time friend of another player, but he needs to learn he can't have his own way over everything.
Aeromus 07-11-05, 05:28 PM	When the hexblade starts asking about the human's and gnomes' backgrounds, the answer is basically "None of your business." So the hexblade begins to beat the snot out of the insolent, yet defenseless fellow prisoner. This act alone changes his alignment. He acted first and formost chaoticially. And, then Evil.. One just does not beat helpless people when they don't give up personal information... Wait.. Thugs, and Gang Bangers do that...
Chobemaster 07-11-05, 06:07 PM	This act alone changes his alignment. He acted first and formost chaoticially. And, then Evil.. One just does not beat helpless people when they don't give up personal information... Wait.. Thugs, and Gang Bangers do that... WAY overstated, one action doesn't make an alignment change, and bad temper can be a characteristic of any alignment.
Always-Late 07-11-05, 07:11 PM	I have a bad temper, and I don't believe I've ever beaten up helpless people. That's either evil, or CG/CN psychotic.
Moonflyer 07-11-05, 07:23 PM	It's not a true neutral act thou one action does not make a character alignment... if he continues with the chaotic tendencies then pop him to chaotic neutral... it can be tough playing the odd man out so give him a few sessions and see what you got.
WCH 07-11-05, 07:44 PM	Mostly it's just an Evil act... as a Lawful Evil character would dispense the beating to punish disrespect, and the Chaotic Evil character would just because he didn't like the guy.
Todd 07-11-05, 08:47 PM	Heh. I'm the guy who played the cleric in this game. Just wanted to add that the place the party 'woke up' in was a Gith slaver ship ... so, yeah, we pretty much assumed that our captors were evil. ;) This was a really fun game outside the one nasty incident and the threats by the Hexblade guy afterwards. That however was no fun at all.
createvmind 07-12-05, 01:06 AM	I'm curious how that all played out because unless hexblade and other PC's had improved Unarmed Strike there was supposed to be a hella bunch of Aoo chains going on there. Umm as to your question, a celstial and hexblade in same party with the hexblade not playing neutral it at all it seems will be a powderkeg in no time at all. The other PC's probably are now just waiting for his next outburst so they can be snot outta him.
Aeromus 07-12-05, 01:39 AM	The first action of your character in the first game "DOES" dictate your alignment. Nuff said.
celtredleg 07-12-05, 01:55 AM	The first action of your character in the first game "DOES" dictate your alignment. Nuff said. You have 100% of his actions as evil, so thats a good reason to tell him its a shift. It just doesnt seem as if this guy really wants to make it work as he claimed.
Gedrin 07-12-05, 02:25 AM	The Hex beats up his fellow prisoners. The Hex beats up his supposed party members. The Hex threatens to kill his supposed party members. Without the OOC obligation of players to stick together as PC's, the Hex would likely wake up at the inn to find the whole party had left without leaving a forwarding address. Clearly, the character doesn't fit. However, that's not the big problem. This is almost certainly a player problem, not a character problem. Attacking fellow PC's for no good reason is a sign of bad sportsmanship and a highly self centered attitude. I recomend directly confronting the player and making sure he knows what the expectations are in regard to teamwork. If you let him stay, don't be surprised when he starts trying to kill PC's. If you let him, you're partly responsible for ruining the fun of the victim character's player. This is about as obvious a warning that you can get that he's gonna be a probelm in the future.
Mel Kio 07-12-05, 03:04 AM	Honestly there shouldn't be a problem with his character being the ruffian of the party to give it an edge but it has to be within reasonable limits. Those actions are definitely chaotic stupid/psychotic though, however I'd attribute that to lack of experience. Have him review the alignments again and remind him that wild actions like that will quickly alter his alignment for the worse.
FriendoftheDork 07-12-05, 06:33 AM	Well he aplogogized. Just beware of this happening again. BTW was it an OOC or IC apology? If only OOC the party might want a apology as well.
Carn Vandoril 07-12-05, 07:20 AM	.......Have a pointed discusion with him. If he cant keep a cooperative image in his mind, then its just going to be an ongoing problem. ........He may claim to be TN, but when you talk to him it may well sound more CE... ...... LG-NG-CG-LN all seem to work togather just fine. TN should work with just about everybody, but I havent seen many play TN very well. Usually they turn much more chaotic than nuetral. I mostly agree with celtredleg, The guy had a bad start, but things turned out ok. Make him aware of the fact that TN is difficult and that he might want to take a closer look at it. I don't agree with him being CE just jet. Also, I'm concerned about the AoO's like an above poster mentioned. but he, it's probably no big deal.
Eightbitmage 07-12-05, 07:32 AM	There is a reason people don't do this, if this is how the guy percieves true neutral, its not that you have to change his alignment from N to CE or NE, its that he has been that way all along and he wrote the wrong alignment. One evil act most of the time won't change someone evil, have you ever met anyone in real life that has beaten someone for withholding personal information? Only an evil person could see this as justifiable. Just because someone insults you or doesn't do as you ask doesn't mean you can do whatever you want to them, if you believe that you're evil. I guess this is just something I think people forget way too often when they play D&D. The best way to remember how a true neutral person will act? Just think about how a normal, average person will think morally of the situation, then act as though your character feels that. Would the average person be disgusted by the beating of helpless individuals for no real reason? Then it isn't something someone who is true neutral will do.
Carn Vandoril 07-12-05, 07:37 AM	One evil act most of the time won't change someone evil, have you ever met anyone in real life that has beaten someone for withholding personal information? Only an evil person could see this as justifiable. Just because someone insults you or doesn't do as you ask doesn't mean you can do whatever you want to them, if you believe that you're evil. I guess this is just something I think people forget way too often when they play D&D. hm.. I remember somethings happening in prisons on Cuba and in Irak. I would call it an evil act, rather than evil persons. Extreem situations tend to lead to extreme measurements. Point is... didn't he understand TN, or did he? If he did... he might have wrote the wrong alignment, if he didn't he should take a closer look.
Eightbitmage 07-12-05, 09:54 AM	hm.. I remember somethings happening in prisons on Cuba and in Irak. I would call it an evil act, rather than evil persons. Yes but theres a difference between "where were you on september 11th.... No answer eh? well how do you like this!?" Versus, "Hi I'm george, where did you grow up?" "I dont want to talk about it" "No answer eh? Well how do you like this!?" The first is probably an evil act a neutral person could justify, while the second is the act of a psycotic.
ajmastrean 07-12-05, 10:13 AM	@Carn Vandoril Yeah, Castro put plenty of people into jail in Cuba without trials or anything. A majority were political enemies of his and plenty of them were killed...that's evil. In Iraq, Hussein had people jailed for religious beliefs, political dissidence, and just plain whim. They were tortured, interrogated, raped, and killed most of the time. Pretty evil stuff. Good thing we got into both of those places and rounded up those Evil guys and tried to get the information that would help us get the rest of them and clean up the area....whew, sounds like a Good action. @Beefment I am not sure if you did this, but I make sure to explicitly describe the responsibilities of the players in the campaign (I run mostly Good campaigns with relatively experienced players). Make sure they understand what alignment is and how it affects gameplay (alignment reflects character, not the other way around). And if things get out of hand, I will stop and make certain desicions out of game if the game itself is in danger. Players have a responsibility to the game...and only really responsible, mature players can handle playing an Evil character in a Good party. You as the DM also have to know when to sacrifice RP and flexibility in game for the good of the whole.
AntiDjinn 07-12-05, 12:56 PM	There is also a difference between how you act towards someone who is your prisoner or whom you otherwise consider a foe, vs. how you act towards a fellow prisoner. They were all in a bad situation together and this guy turned on a potential ally just because he felt disrespected. The most True Neutral imperative of all: Personal survival, should provide a strong incentive not to harm someone who might later be helping in the fight against the guards. In this case the stronger imperative was dealing with a personal sleight. By the way, this more or less gives you a way to manage this player from here on out: If you want his character to take a particular side just have the opposite side be surly or disrespectful. His ego probably can't take it when NPCs fail to defer to his authority. Just keep this in mind when planning encounters and you can forget both stick and carrot and just lead the guy by his issues.
Liwmial 07-12-05, 01:17 PM	Seems like the end justifies his means of deception ... now kill off his character and don't let him roll a new one 'till he can play nice.
Beefment 07-12-05, 03:23 PM	I'm curious how that all played out because unless hexblade and other PC's had improved Unarmed Strike there was supposed to be a hella bunch of Aoo chains going on there. There were plenty of AoO's. The problem was low-level guards who couldn't roll above a natural 4. :P (This wizard with eschew materials didn't help either.) Thanks for the comments so far. It seems like most everyone is in agreement. Alignment arguements rarely go anywhere since few people agree on what good/evil is. So alignments aside, the hexblade definately wasn't being a team player by trying to thwart the party's will. I think that's the tact I'll take if it comes up again.
Siduakal 07-12-05, 03:31 PM	A) They agreed to make a TN work.. not a CE. And he definitely seemed chaotic evil. B) He's supposed to be a bodyguard, yet he's putting the son in jeopardy by attacking guards and such?
Wink the Gnoll 07-12-05, 06:31 PM	I have a bad temper, and I don't believe I've ever beaten up helpless people. That's either evil, or CG/CN psychotic. That's my opinion as well. An act like that (without mitigating circumstances far more extensive than an unknown person refusing to talk to you) means that you are evil at that point--absolutely evil. It could not be countenanced by a good or neutral person. Maybe a neutral person might be selfish enough to do it, if it were with foreknowledge that it would precipitate an escape, but I didn't get that from the OP.
Siduakal 07-12-05, 06:46 PM	And yea.. I have a horrid temper. I've broke my own fist on an oak door to avoid hitting someone before. But I've NEVER went off on someone defenseless. Your temper makes you snap easy, it doesn't make you a coward who beats innocents, children, women, and puppies alike. He's CE. NE or CN at best..