Backed myself into a corner... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Backed myself into a corner... [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Khisanth Magus
02-09-06, 01:50 PM I'm in sort of a situation in a campaign I'm in right now, and can't find a good way out of it other than remaking a new character...

I am playing a Tiefling Wizard, who started out NG. The rest of the party consists of a favored soul, rogue, druid, and a cleric who originally didn't even know who her diety is, but was later revealed to be an evil god who was sealed away eons ago.

To make a long story short, the party got split up at one point as we were fleeing for our lives from a wizard who I presume from what we now know to be controlled by an ancient priest of Vecna.

The favored soul, rogue, and druid ended up on an island inhabited by the souls of those who sealed our party's cleric's dark god away(his name is Exe by the way).

Me and the cleric, due to me being a tiefling and her being a cleric of Exe, were unable to get on the island, and as a matter of fact ran away to avoid doing so. We ended up getting sucked into a vortex that put a magical compulsion on us to release Exe from his prison. The other half of the party was recruited by the ghosts to prevent the seal on Exe from being broken.

This created a very obvious divide in the party. The DM didn't consider how far me and the cleric were willing to go, however. To this point we have made 3 or 4 attempts on the lives of our fellow party members, some more subtle than others. It was kind of easy to justify this...their goal was to stop something we were magically compelled to do. What else were we going to do?

The DM was getting kind of distressed by our attempts(and has been doing everything in his power to keep them alive, which has saved them repeatedly...they should all be dead now), so while we were in the dungeon in which the seal is in, he finally found away to gracefully negate the magical compulsion. He didn't, however, expect us 2 to continue on our original goal of killing off the party and freeing Exe. My character's secret agenda has basically always been to spread chaos, through any means. She views Exe's release as the best way to cause chaos. The cleric wants to free her god. To compound the problem, during our last attempt to kill the party the DM forced us to take an alignment drop to Evil.

Now, the DM has made it plain through all the times he has saved the party that he is NOT going to let us kill them unless he can't find a way out of it(which, being the DM, he pretty much always can). But I am equally trapped in my role. It has gone too far for me to just back out and remain in character, and I am one of those players who is unwilling to go against what their character would do even if it causes the character to die.

I just don't know what to do at this point. I've played d&d(and practically every other rpg) for almost 10 years now, and I've never ran into a situation where I've backed myself into a corner like this. I don't want this character to die(i've become rather attached to her), but there is no way I can think of to get out of this gracefully.
TrajanCavalous
02-09-06, 02:09 PM Where appropriate I've had pc's who are turned or turn against the party become npc's, separate them from the group and then the dm runs them. Your dm seems to not want this kind of play in his game, you don't want to compromise the game so a scene where the characters aims become known and the character flees or has previously separated from the group would be appropriate. If the dm agrees to then run the character as an enemy like any other then your rp concerns will be served vicariously and you can have the fun of making anew character and fighting your own creation at some point.
pmurray@bigpond.com
02-11-06, 10:20 AM Yes, this is usually the way that CE parties go. Pretty standard, really - move on: nothing to see here.

Maybe you guys should play "Paranoia" for a session or two and get it out of your system.
DeadKeepWalking
02-11-06, 10:45 AM I disagree with the DM of your game. I prefer players who actually play their characters as if they were their characters. The DM shouldn't punish a player for actually role-playing their character.

I have had a divide similar to this in a group, and everyone was trying to play their characters, with the final result of two groups being formed. It turned into a "chess" match between these two groups, and although it was taxing on my DM abilities, I rather enjoyed that short game, and so did the players.
It was different, and it pitted the player's intelligence, and skills against each other to see who would come out on top, by manipulating the surroundings, and in a few cases, outright attacking each other.
ShadowDragon8685
02-11-06, 01:43 PM I'm not following.

Your Teifling wizard started out Neutral Good.

So why has her goal shifted to spreading chaos? You left that one out. NG would want to spread GOOD a goal that is decidedly un-served by spreading Chaos.
DeadKeepWalking
02-11-06, 01:52 PM Good and Chaos are two different things. Good and Chaos are not opposites.
Good means you help others.
Chaos means there are few, if any laws or social order.
Being good doesn't mean you have to follow the laws or social norms.

If anything, a shift to Chaotic would have been a better choice.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Khisanth Magus 02-09-06, 01:50 PM	I'm in sort of a situation in a campaign I'm in right now, and can't find a good way out of it other than remaking a new character... I am playing a Tiefling Wizard, who started out NG. The rest of the party consists of a favored soul, rogue, druid, and a cleric who originally didn't even know who her diety is, but was later revealed to be an evil god who was sealed away eons ago. To make a long story short, the party got split up at one point as we were fleeing for our lives from a wizard who I presume from what we now know to be controlled by an ancient priest of Vecna. The favored soul, rogue, and druid ended up on an island inhabited by the souls of those who sealed our party's cleric's dark god away(his name is Exe by the way). Me and the cleric, due to me being a tiefling and her being a cleric of Exe, were unable to get on the island, and as a matter of fact ran away to avoid doing so. We ended up getting sucked into a vortex that put a magical compulsion on us to release Exe from his prison. The other half of the party was recruited by the ghosts to prevent the seal on Exe from being broken. This created a very obvious divide in the party. The DM didn't consider how far me and the cleric were willing to go, however. To this point we have made 3 or 4 attempts on the lives of our fellow party members, some more subtle than others. It was kind of easy to justify this...their goal was to stop something we were magically compelled to do. What else were we going to do? The DM was getting kind of distressed by our attempts(and has been doing everything in his power to keep them alive, which has saved them repeatedly...they should all be dead now), so while we were in the dungeon in which the seal is in, he finally found away to gracefully negate the magical compulsion. He didn't, however, expect us 2 to continue on our original goal of killing off the party and freeing Exe. My character's secret agenda has basically always been to spread chaos, through any means. She views Exe's release as the best way to cause chaos. The cleric wants to free her god. To compound the problem, during our last attempt to kill the party the DM forced us to take an alignment drop to Evil. Now, the DM has made it plain through all the times he has saved the party that he is NOT going to let us kill them unless he can't find a way out of it(which, being the DM, he pretty much always can). But I am equally trapped in my role. It has gone too far for me to just back out and remain in character, and I am one of those players who is unwilling to go against what their character would do even if it causes the character to die. I just don't know what to do at this point. I've played d&d(and practically every other rpg) for almost 10 years now, and I've never ran into a situation where I've backed myself into a corner like this. I don't want this character to die(i've become rather attached to her), but there is no way I can think of to get out of this gracefully.
TrajanCavalous 02-09-06, 02:09 PM	Where appropriate I've had pc's who are turned or turn against the party become npc's, separate them from the group and then the dm runs them. Your dm seems to not want this kind of play in his game, you don't want to compromise the game so a scene where the characters aims become known and the character flees or has previously separated from the group would be appropriate. If the dm agrees to then run the character as an enemy like any other then your rp concerns will be served vicariously and you can have the fun of making anew character and fighting your own creation at some point.
pmurray@bigpond.com 02-11-06, 10:20 AM	Yes, this is usually the way that CE parties go. Pretty standard, really - move on: nothing to see here. Maybe you guys should play "Paranoia" for a session or two and get it out of your system.
DeadKeepWalking 02-11-06, 10:45 AM	I disagree with the DM of your game. I prefer players who actually play their characters as if they were their characters. The DM shouldn't punish a player for actually role-playing their character. I have had a divide similar to this in a group, and everyone was trying to play their characters, with the final result of two groups being formed. It turned into a "chess" match between these two groups, and although it was taxing on my DM abilities, I rather enjoyed that short game, and so did the players. It was different, and it pitted the player's intelligence, and skills against each other to see who would come out on top, by manipulating the surroundings, and in a few cases, outright attacking each other.
ShadowDragon8685 02-11-06, 01:43 PM	I'm not following. Your Teifling wizard started out Neutral Good. So why has her goal shifted to spreading chaos? You left that one out. NG would want to spread GOOD a goal that is decidedly un-served by spreading Chaos.
DeadKeepWalking 02-11-06, 01:52 PM	Good and Chaos are two different things. Good and Chaos are not opposites. Good means you help others. Chaos means there are few, if any laws or social order. Being good doesn't mean you have to follow the laws or social norms. If anything, a shift to Chaotic would have been a better choice.