Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Kitt-su 08-18-04, 08:08 PM	I know I shouldn't be comlaining but still. We've got this new DM see. He loves paladins and DnD religions and the influence they can have. So he decides that the gods basically call all the shots in the world. Your deities alignment has to be yours, acting unlike your god is utter blasphemy. Its also like eveyone immediately knows your alignment(But thats besides the point). This is fine and dandy for me I'm experienced enough to adapt to the circumstances. So we all roll up characters and then he tells us that if you aren't a paladin (or the bard) you were paid to do this and the paladins are the leaders. This new DM hasn't played much 3.5e and used to play 2e, but only played it. The paladin is one of my good magic playing buddies but hes a terrible leader (although he doesn't see it), and the other paladin is also one of my magic playin' folk, but hes a little greedy at times. I'm not in the wrong here am I? A leader should naturally emerge (I've only been the leader twice though out of a bunch of games), but just telling someone they get to boss everyone around is a little off in my eyes. Am I just being a little :censored: here or what?
Kiri Sittori 08-18-04, 10:24 PM	Originally posted by Kitt-su I know I shouldn't be comlaining but still. We've got this new DM see. He loves paladins and DnD religions and the influence they can have. So he decides that the gods basically call all the shots in the world. Your deities alignment has to be yours, acting unlike your god is utter blasphemy. Its also like eveyone immediately knows your alignment(But thats besides the point). This is fine and dandy for me I'm experienced enough to adapt to the circumstances. So we all roll up characters and then he tells us that if you aren't a paladin (or the bard) you were paid to do this and the paladins are the leaders. This new DM hasn't played much 3.5e and used to play 2e, but only played it. The paladin is one of my good magic playing buddies but hes a terrible leader (although he doesn't see it), and the other paladin is also one of my magic playin' folk, but hes a little greedy at times. I'm not in the wrong here am I? A leader should naturally emerge (I've only been the leader twice though out of a bunch of games), but just telling someone they get to boss everyone around is a little off in my eyes. Am I just being a little :censored: here or what? Ignoring the potential problems related to the milieu for a moment, here's what you do. Since the DM seems to think that yer character's nothing but a hireling, play as though you are one. In fact, pull the other players (who aren't playing Armoured Halos) aside, set up a common background where yer all a mercenary company hired by the pallys... and then BE MERCENARY. The DM can't allege that sellsword units must be led by bards and halos, and neither pala-player will be able to lead effectively. Why? The poor-leader pally is bad for morale, and the greedy pally is holding out on the fair share of loot, also bad for morale. This works even for good-aligned mercs, though you'll also need to seize upon opportunities to do good that the halos overlook. ((As for the problems... it strains credulity in the extreme to believe that EVERY ALIGNMENT AND PORTFOLIO is represented by highly oppressive gods. What becomes of nations where the citizens are (and invariably) at variance with their liege-lords' gods, for example?))
Thorak 08-18-04, 10:57 PM	As mentioned; you're a mercenary. The moment your character doesn't feel the money is worth dealing with the idiot paladin's righteousness, zealotry, and poor leadership, walk.
BW0222 08-19-04, 12:02 AM	Leader has a lot of meanings in play. First, authority may dictate a leader, but authority is typically situational. For example, in a city adventure a rogue or bard might be the leader simply because they end up doing the talking with the 'shadowy'-types the party is likely to meet. In an outdoor trip, a ranger or druid might take over since they are more likely to get direct an outdoor encounter to an easier outcome. When dealing with clergy, a paladin might be a better speaker. Your race, class, nationality, background, and alignment (and those you are dealing with) can all make a certain PC a better choice of a leader. A good campaign is going to give every PC a chance to shine. Second, some players are better organizers, taticians, notekeepers, mappers, planners, etc. A bard character whose player keeps notes about everything, maps, etc. may make a better 'leader' than a paladin, since he remembers directions to where the party is going and the password to get to the secret room. A wizard might be a better 'leader' in combat since he is typically in a better position to direct the battle and often directs the flow of combat with spells -- fireballs and webs often require getting folks out of the way. Third, a paladin in 3.x is hardly the leader in 1.x or 2.x. A sorceror or bard is likely a better talker, and a cleric, druid, or rogue could be also. Paladins are hardly leaders of their churches -- they would typically be guards for the clergy. A cleric from the same church (or allied church) could likely give orders to the paladin. Depending upon the campaign, a halfling could be a lord, a druid might be the daughter of a popular hero, or the local wizard guild could be so powerful that folks 'respect' the parties wizard. Blindly assuming that a paladin leads because he is a paladin is a stretch -- depending upon the location, the paladin's religion might be banned. A good DM is going to come up with a basic heirarchy of social standings in each area. In D&D it is pretty hard to assume that the paladin's religion is going to trump all other considerations -- race, nobility, military standing, money, etc., etc. across the continent.
Telperion 08-19-04, 12:20 AM	Did anyone, by chance, create a cleric? Because if they did then that would place them (as per' church hierarchy) above the paladins, especially if they are of the same belief. And even if they are not, then the paladins are likely to listen to the cleric, because...well, you know... clerics are the hand of whatever deity they serve, and the paladins are just swords that the hand wields. EDIT: playing a cleric can be a great deal of fun, because from the very first level you really get answers (although fairly unreliable ones) directly from your deity. The paladins on the hand don't get this kind of treatment as they are stuck with the lower level divinations, which are questionable at best. So, a mid-level cleric could simply state that he hears the voice of his deity so much better than the paladins that they really should listen to him.
Dragonspirit 08-19-04, 04:42 AM	I actually think your DM is overextending his reach. He's free to set the circumstances, but he's starting to micromanage the PC interaction. Now, the Paladins may have more important roles in his world -- that's cool. But an individual party dynamic is something set by the character interaction. As BWO222 mentioned, depending on where you're at other characters may be more suited to lead. The bard or rogue may be the only one able to get down and dirty, and interact with the less scrupulous elements. More importantly, we're all individuals. Just because someone is Lawful Good, doesn't mean they have the same personality. You can have someone who matches that alignment that is annoying in some manner. Two Lawful Good guys might end up in a shouting match or a fistfight depending on THIER PERSONALITY. IOW, a person's (or character's) individual background determines a lot more about their ability to mesh into the role of a good leader.
Joe Khol 08-19-04, 07:02 AM	Originally posted by Kitt-su I know I shouldn't be comlaining but still. You should, just not to us :) There is nothing fundamentally wrong with the DM's campaign world though he is being a little too prescriptive about it (his inexperience showing). 1) Play the game as is and deal with the issues IC. So the church says the Paladin is the boss. If your character thinks he can do a better job what's stopping him taking over (subtly or blatantly) once you're out in the field? Think of those war films with the straight-from-college lieutenants and grizzly old sergeants who are really in charge. 2) Talk the the DM. Suggest it might be better if he wasn't so prescriptive and let the party develop more naturally. In fact, if he accepts the advice he might be happy for you to run with option 1. At the end of the day, first time DMs make mistakes (and this is far from being the worst). The only way to learn is practice. Give him a plenty of support and a bit of time and things should improve.
preacher of nothing 08-19-04, 07:22 AM	1) remind the DM you're larger and stronger than he is "Thou shalt not meddle in my affairs, for i am larger and stronger and you are easily broken in two" 2) Ask him if he has nun fantasies ok, no seriously now: 3) Remind him that the paladin is only ONE class out of all the others. It's not a good game if you're going to undermine the strength of the others. Remind him that the bard is specialized in diplomacy and that he is the one to lead the party.
Lincoln Hills 08-19-04, 01:25 PM	Although I also got very big eyes at your description of your DM's decisions re: class and re: alignment, I also have a suggestion for you. Synopsis: Recently I was playing in an Oriental campaign. The group had a single samurai, and I had chosen ranger as my class. The samurai player was "the new guy" - relatively inexperienced but enthusiastic - so I jumped in at character generation and made arrangements with the samurai player to be his able henchman. Since your setting isn't Oriental, you don't have to rely on caste systems to do this for you. Just arrange with the paladins to take care of "earthly matters" such as strategy, accounting and similar dirty work. Have one of them be the 'official leader', and then just present yourself as the group's herald, face-man or diplomat. You'll also find it enjoyable to play such a character - provided your alignment is pretty close to LG, so the arguments will be minimized.
Salla 08-19-04, 01:29 PM	Well, the first, simple answer is that just because this guy's the leader doesn't mean you have to listen to him if he's being stupid. Theoretically, since he's Lawful, which means group-oriented and orderly, the decision of who is party leader should be made by a vote or some other form of group-mind decision making. Two, remind your Paladin(s) that true leaders, *REAL* leaders, do not sieze power; they are given it by those who follow them. Any fool can lead, but not anybody can make people follow them. "Don't just give orders. LEAD. There's a DIFFERENCE." Three ... play someone who doesn't have a patron diety. Just because there are gods doesn't mean your character will feel any of them are worthy of his worship (and if they're all such power-hungry nosy buttinskys, it seems it'd be even more likely). So, you can just inform Mr. Paladin(s) that you don't care whose divine butt he kisses ... or, as one of my characters once put it, "I follow a force more powerful than any god. My conscience." It works when you're CG, at least. I, personally, would chafe at the 'forced to be a mercenary' bit, since I don't do 'anything for money' well ... my characters all have consciences. That is far too limiting for my taste ... on the other hand, you can turn this against them. "Yes, I was paid to do this job, and THIS JERK --" Point at Paladin "-- is screwing everything up because he can't lead an otyugh to an outhouse! Since listening to you is at odds with the contract I signed/agreed to, I'm calling for a vote for a new leader."
masterofmayhem 08-19-04, 01:43 PM	Originally posted by Kitt-su Your deities alignment has to be yours, acting unlike your god is utter blasphemy. :heehee Does he even know how the gods act? Does he know their exact personality traits? Most likely he thinks he does (because of that tiny little paragraph about each god in chpapter 6 of the PHB), but the gods aren't exactly all they're cracked up to be . . . I am currently reading the FR books on the time of troubles, and I gotta say, any DM who wants his players to have personalities similar to their god is just asking for verbal fights to break out every other minute. Man, those gods are arrogant . . .
Thelandrach 08-19-04, 02:03 PM	It sounds like the DM told you about the paladins being leaders after people had created their characters. If so, that's lame. It also sounds like he might have told you about the alignment/deity fanatacism thing after you created your characters. That's also pretty lame. "Here, roll up whatever characters you want. Come up with a background and let me know what it is... okay, now, here's how you're going to play your characters..." Last time a GM tried that sort of thing on me, I just handed him my character sheet and asked him to let me know when it was time for me to play my character again.
Salla 08-19-04, 04:39 PM	Originally posted by masterofmayhem Man, those gods are arrogant . . . Another good reason to choose not to worship one. ;)
a18ffe 08-19-04, 10:25 PM	Kinda reminds me of a metallica song, but why be the puppet...be the puppet master. If your paladin friend is not a great leader, it will show, and you will be there to help him out. The other guy is seems controllable. Just don't take any shite from any of them.
Kiri Sittori 08-19-04, 10:36 PM	Originally posted by Salla Another good reason to choose not to worship one. ;) Of course, having yer post-mortal soul welded to the walls of Kelemvor's tower, either to be SLOWLY disintegrated or sold to the highest-bidding Fiend Slaver, may seem incentive enough to worship one... not to mention the other side effects of being an atheist in a world where all the gods walked the earth in (more likely than not) in yer own lifetime...
masterofmayhem 08-19-04, 11:03 PM	Pssh . . . you don't really fall for all that "unending eternal torment for the rest of eternity propaganda," do you? What a bunch of bull. "Blah, blah, blah, eternal torment, blah, blah, blah," Honestly, it couldn't really be all that bad, could it? ;)
Zyphus 08-19-04, 11:36 PM	I think, if you accept the DM's world and all the rest you should accept how the world would expect the religious members to be the leaders, or at least the figureheads. In my campaign a human had to be leader, but when they went to the Dwarven kingdom the dwarf got to lead. My world is fairly racist, and the elves always get picked on. There is an elven area, but the party refuses to go there! No one in my group is a tactician but at least sometimes they are willing to discuss things and vote on ideas. Of course, the leader is the only one with the power to veto, since the leader's reputation is on the line with the party's actions. I also played in a campaign where I was a paladin of Athena. I was on a mission for the church so the other players were all hired. If people did extra, I could recommend that the church pay them a bonus. Of course, I was not getting paid. After that mission, they kept me on as leader but the campaign quickly died.
ck2001wendt 08-20-04, 05:16 AM	Use it as an opportunity to role-play: 1. If the Paladins end up being good leaders, so be it. (Doesn´t look like this is going to happen). 2. If the Paladins are "bad" leaders, it will show through in the field. Let them be the "party face" and deal with the authorities in town. But when everyone gets out into the field, green Lt. Paladin is going to take a back seat to grizzled Sgt. Ranger once the party realizes that the Pally´s orders are just going to get everyone killed. If the Pally presses his point or acts obnoxious, just ignore him. Unless he´s also several levels higher than the party, good luck trying to force you to do something you don´t want to do. If they go back and "tell on you," just contradict his story, or leave his service. 3. And if all else fails...frag em while they´re sleeping...then go back into town and say the Goblins did it. If your Pally is such a bad leader that it would have led to all your deaths, I´d call that a "neutral" action...killing in self-preservation.
Salla 08-20-04, 02:32 PM	Originally posted by Kiri Sittori Of course, having yer post-mortal soul welded to the walls of Kelemvor's tower, either to be SLOWLY disintegrated or sold to the highest-bidding Fiend Slaver, may seem incentive enough to worship one... not to mention the other side effects of being an atheist in a world where all the gods walked the earth in (more likely than not) in yer own lifetime... I didn't say 'be an atheist', I said 'don't worship a diety'. He didn't say the game was in the Misbegotten Realms, so its nonsense about afterlife-screwing wouldn't necessarily apply. The standard D&D 'go to the plane matching your alignment' would. So, LG character with no diety still goes to the LG plane and does whatever it is you do there, until someone decides to use Resurrection and you come back (if you want to, of course). Besides, once the character's dead, who cares? He's dead ... unless someone resurrects him, whatever may happen afterward is meaningless. Just because a diety is there doesn't mean it deserves to be worshipped. If I were a god, anyway, I'd much rather have a worshipper who worships me because he agrees with what I represent and respects me than one who feigns worship just because he wants to cover his own butt. That's not even worship, that's just being selfish. "Can we finish up this virgin sacrifice/demon summoning combo real quick? I need to go make an offering at the temple of Heironeous." Most of my characters take that stance. "Yes, there are gods. Yes, they are powerful. No, I don't worship one because there's not one that matches my beliefs." If he encounters a god in the flesh (or whatever ...), he'll be respectful, but not reverent.
Aki Warren 08-20-04, 04:40 PM	I like Tanis Half-elven's experience with Takhisis. Yes, he didn't worship her, but when he stood in her presence he WANTED to worship her. Because she was just BETTER, perfect even compared to him in every way
trapspringer 08-20-04, 08:29 PM	I beleive there is a term for a person who recognizes the probable existance of a diety or dieties, but refrains from showing false praise to apease, or sometimes even commit to the beleif of a god at all. Agnostic.
Salla 08-21-04, 05:15 PM	Originally posted by Aki Warren I like Tanis Half-elven's experience with Takhisis. Yes, he didn't worship her, but when he stood in her presence he WANTED to worship her. Because she was just BETTER, perfect even compared to him in every way ... Isn't Takhisis the big-bad-evil of Dragonlance? That by itself proves that she isn't better than he is, and is far from perfect. More powerful, assuredly. But better? No. If Tanis had an desire to worship her, he really needs some therapy.
Derren S. 08-21-04, 06:24 PM	Yes, Thakisis is evil, but she is a god and when a mortal stands before a god exactly that what Warren described should happen no matter of the alignment.
ck2001wendt 08-22-04, 06:12 AM	-------------------------------------- Yes, Thakisis is evil, but she is a god and when a mortal stands before a god exactly that what Warren described should happen no matter of the alignment. -------------------------------------- Divine Rank has its privileges... ;)
RogerWilco 08-22-04, 10:08 AM	Just my 2 xp: In second edition there was a mercenary kit for warriors, it gave lot's of benefits, but it had one catch, they always had to work for the one giving them the best deal. We had a mercenary in our party 2nd ed. as bodyguard to the leader noble elf warrior of the party, but the wages for this bodyguard became so high** that later in the campaign the elf was often left with almost no loot at the end of the adventure ;) Eventually the mercenary left (and the player rolled a new character) Just be a mercenary that worships olidammara or something* like that, be greedy. * Waukeen, brandobaris, vergadain,etc. ** DragonEye dealing, sixcoffers, thousandheads, trueshield trading costers and local mechants were constantly trying to hire the mercenary.
Salla 08-22-04, 02:16 PM	Originally posted by Derren S. Yes, Thakisis is evil, but she is a god and when a mortal stands before a god exactly that what Warren described should happen no matter of the alignment. That may be the dumbest thing I have *EVER* read on these forums. "It's the embodiment of evil! The destroyer of hopes and dreams! An unholy abomination dedicated to reducing the planet to a hellhole of tyranny and despair, where human rights are long forgotten and all sentient beings are her unwilling slaves! All those who dare to oppose her demonic rule will suffer her horrible wrath, suffering in such unfathomable ways that they will beg for death that will never come! ... I want to worship it!" Uh-huh. Waiter, reality check, please?:rolleyes:
Hia 08-22-04, 02:41 PM	Originally posted by Salla That may be the dumbest thing I have *EVER* read on these forums. "It's the embodiment of evil! The destroyer of hopes and dreams! An unholy abomination dedicated to reducing the planet to a hellhole of tyranny and despair, where human rights are long forgotten and all sentient beings are her unwilling slaves! All those who dare to oppose her demonic rule will suffer her horrible wrath, suffering in such unfathomable ways that they will beg for death that will never come! ... I want to worship it!" Uh-huh. Waiter, reality check, please?:rolleyes: True, on all points. But. . .She is also a goddess. Mortals, when in the direct presence of a god, are almost always overwhelmed by it. The fact that she isthe head of all the evil gods says alot about her power.
ck2001wendt 08-22-04, 03:27 PM	Don´t confuse Alignment with Power, Salla. I´ve noticed, from working in politics and meeting people of "power" (state and federal legislators, CEOs of Fortune 500 corporations, and one President), that people in positions of power tend to command respect even when you disagree with them on their issues. Now, I may be weak-willed, but reading newspaper reports I´ve seen that this is true more broadly. Unless you have directly volunteered to heckle a candidate, people usually can be Awed by a persuasive politician, at least until they are no longer in their presence. In more Game Mechanical terms, Hickman and Weis gave Takhisis an "Awe" effect, one which could convince someone like Tanis (who wasn´t terribly noble, and often fell on the "neutral" side of CG during the Chronicles) that she should be worshipped, at least when in her direct presence. A more evil person would probably become a convert straight away, while someone more pure of heart (Laurana, a Paladin) would stand steadfast in their resolve. Takhisis, and any God, work on a level of power adventures could never possibly comprehend (or players, except that we can break the 4th Wall, and therefore she´s just a compilation of statistics to us).
Hia 08-22-04, 06:02 PM	Nonsense. Raistlin managed to comprehend and kill The Dark Queen, so not all evil people would worship her. Some would seek to kill her, and take her stuff.
ck2001wendt 08-23-04, 09:59 AM	Well, Raistalin wasn´t exactly weak willed now, was he? When he undertook the battle you speak of, he was Master of Past and Present. He combined his own formidable magical prowess with that of one of the greatest mages pre-Cataclysm. When he went after the Dark Queen, he was the undisputed master of magic on Ansalon (and probably Krynn). In 3.0 Game Mechanic terms, Raistalin had a high Int, a high Wis, and a pretty *****in Will save. He was a singular individual in the World of Krynn, and we can no more call his reaction to the Dark Queen standard for someone in that situation than we could call Huma´s reaction to the Dark Queen standard. These men moved a step above "hero" or "villian" and into the realm of "legend," where you would place the mightiest dragons and titans. Tanis, on the other hand, has a long record in the Chronicles of spotty decision-making...most notably the infamous "putting on his boots" scene in Flotsam. He was "merely" a fighter, and one who was always ambivalent about his role as "hero." So I think it is perfectly acceptable to say that Tanis reacted normally for someone of his power level and temprament. Were someone like Goldmoon or Elistan put in that position, however, I´m guessing their innate resolve would have been strong enough that while they would have been cowed, they would not have gone through the same moment of weakness that Tanis did.
Asta Kask 08-24-04, 06:24 AM	If things don't go your way, strike. It happened on numerous times in history. During the 30-years war, several armies stopped because the mercenaries wouldn't march until they got paid. They also refused to march unless it was in a direction where there was severe amounts of loot. For some reason, the trend of hiring mercenaries went downhill from there...