Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Prelate 08-10-07, 10:42 AM	I'm in a great group, we're in Ravenloft, and it's really a great campaign for the most part. The problem stems from one of the players talking the DM into letting him run a Deathknight in the group. Bear in mind the rest of the group is good alignment. This is after his last character, a LN priest (who was much more evil than neutral in action) was retired because he wanted to do something else. So far, the Deathknigh has *barely* avoided detection or doing something so obvious. There have been some slip ups, but in the interest in avoiding group PVP, we've let some sloppy play slide. We had one player in group see him and his nightmare in a battle with an NPC, but she missed our last session, and is likely to forget to tell the rest of the group (thankfully?). I'm not really interested in forcing that player to change his class, after all it's a game, we're all friends, and I want everyone to enjoy themselves. However, I'm also having a tough time figuring out reasons why I am having to look the other way when he gets sloppy (which is often.. he plays lawful evil, but runs much more chaotic than lawful, more often than not). I'm also not wanting to play the petulant sounding "take control of the player/game or I quit" card with the DM. The DM is a good friend, but is definitely on the more lazy side when it comes to controlling players with strong personality types. I'm hoping for some constructive feedback, or possible solutions to this mini crisis. Thanks!
Prator_the_Legendary 08-10-07, 10:51 AM	Easy. Stop "Not noticing" his "Sloppy" stuff. Say aloud that you're getting suspicious of the guy, in character. Ideally, the sloppy deathknight will start working harder to avoid detection. Alternately, he'll eventually screw up badly enough that he'll have to leave the party, and then you can request that the NEXT guy his player makes not be an evil psycho. You can also take it up directly with the player, but if he's attached to his cat among the pidgeons this may just result in ill feelings.
Prelate 08-10-07, 10:59 AM	we've noticed a few things, and acknowledged awareness of his actions. I half think he is relying on the DM to save him, but at the same time I think the DM is setting the entire group up for conflict because he's unwilling, or scared, to draw any boundries. I've told the player OOC and the character IC, that if we continue in this direction, we will have PVP. I'm really trying to prevent a PVP scenario, but it seems that with the DM unwilling to enforce boundries, and the evil player's inability to be more articulate and less sloppy.. that's where we are going.
Prator_the_Legendary 08-10-07, 11:03 AM	Okay, then. Start ACTING on your suspicions. Go find someone to cast Detect Evil and/or Detect Undead on the deathknight, and his cover will be blown. Then he'll have to either fight (and probably die) or flee, and a new character can be rolled up. If PvP is inevitable, the least you can do is make it quick.
Prelate 08-10-07, 11:13 AM	We are in Ravenloft - detection spells don't work here. We are highly suspicious of this guy, but being good and more lawful than not, we wouldn't attack/kill him without there being no question. I guess I was hoping someone could offer an easy solution I had not thought of, but I suspect this will go where I've always known it would
Prator_the_Legendary 08-10-07, 11:17 AM	Aren't deathknights a type of skeletal undead anyway? What means is this guy using to go unnoticed? Or is he, in fact, a Blackguard?
Prelate 08-10-07, 11:36 AM	deathknight. (I think he got the idea, when we fought some blackguard). he said deathknights can be fleshy, and to keep himself hidden, he never takes his plate armor off. he employs a cantrip to keep us from smelling any bit of decay, and to mute the glow from his eyes. in all of those safeguards he does well.. it's weird stuff like being he passes himself off as a priest of sorts, but never offers healing, the only magic we've seen has been very much the negative type. his 'horse' (nightmare) terrifies any other mounts when it is near the stable. while we can't smell death/decay on him, the fact we never see him without full plate on is very unusual. We also never see him eat or drink (though in all honesty, he did recently tell the group he was wearing a ring of sustenance, and since he wears full plate, we wouldn't know better anyway). the other oddity is that he was given honors by a being we recently found out was a lich, that we had been doing missions for (nothing evil, basically just fighting his evil neighbors, and intruders like illithids). We are sorting out how we will disentangle ourselves from the lich without ******* him off (we're only lvl 7-8 in the group, no way we could take on a lich right now, and while we are good, we're not suicidal). the big thing that made us supsicious was the fact that he was greeted by a vampire lord that borders our lands.. we have an uneasy at best understanding with her that she stays off our land and leaves our people alone, and for the time being we will not try and root her out. the group was immediately taken aback by her being friendly to someone we were already questionable about.
Prator_the_Legendary 08-10-07, 12:11 PM	....Well, with all that in mind, I would take any excuse I could to just vote him out of the adventuring party in-game. Have your character talk with the other characters about how obviously shifty this person is. The group can then decide collectively that they don't feel secure working with this guy and tell him to beat it, or start pressuring him to 'fess up about what he really is and what he's doing. If the deathknight's player knows that this means the end no matter what he does, and doesn't want PvP any more than you do, he'll probably just make the deathknight leave. Otherwise, the PvP is at least expedited a little.
Max Octavious Xavier 08-10-07, 01:36 PM	Summary: A player knowingly created a disruptive character in an established group and the DM won't deal with it a)deal with it and try to take control or b)try to get along and give control to the disruptive player Don't PVP unless he starts it. Just get the group to say (IC) "We don't want to trust you with our lives, so you are no longer welcome to travel with us." OOC, say to the DM, "There is an unwritten rule that we accept any pc you approve, but you abused that trust when you allowed an evil character in a nonevil group. So now we will screen any characters who wants to travel with us" and then screen (again, IC) all future characters who want to join. If the DM won't control this player, you have to. If the group won't back you up on this, your other choice is to just keep playing along and give control to the player of the evil character. I really don't see any other better options. I have been in these situations before and have tried to get along. After many years of trying to get along I have come to the decision that now I won't. If someone knowingly creates a disruptive character in an established group, I will do everything in my characters power to say no. If I am DM, I will say "NO". I'm not really interested in forcing that player to change his class, after all it's a game, we're all friends, and I want everyone to enjoy themselves. Why? He doesn't seem to have any problem making you change your game and reducing your fun (an assumption on my part, but then why else would you be asking for help) so why are you worried about his? From your description... This is after his last character, a LN priest (who was much more evil than neutral in action) was retired because he wanted to do something else. he plays lawful evil, but runs much more chaotic than lawful, more often than not). deathknight. (I think he got the idea, when we fought some blackguard)....he sounds like a disruptive player. This is a fairly common problem, see my signature for more threads on the topic of evil characters. I haven't checked them lately so I apologize for any dead links.
Prator_the_Legendary 08-10-07, 02:30 PM	...While essentially correct, that wasn't terribly helpful, Max. There is another option. You can use the Folding Chair of Salvation. http://forums.gleemax.com/showthread.php?t=759737
Max Octavious Xavier 08-10-07, 02:48 PM	...While essentially correct, that wasn't terribly helpful, Max. Maybe, maybe not, but I have been in similar situations before and have determined that players who knowingly playing a disruptive character are basically bullies and that they should be confronted. Life is too short to game with stupid/bad/disruptive players/characters. IMHO, Prelate sounded like he needed a jolt to get him started on dealing with the situation. Prator_the_Legendary: I just realized, maybe you didn't look under the s-block and just saw the summary. Oh well.
TheCanadian 08-10-07, 03:06 PM	I can understand how an Evil PC in a Non-Evil group can be disruptive, especially if that Evil PC goes around randomly killing innocents, but so far from what I've read the player in question hasn't done anything other than create some good RP. IC, you guys have voiced your suspicions and he has come up with some fairly clever ways of throwing you off the track. So far he hasn't done anything really disruptive to the group, other than being a different alignment. Instead of making him change his character, why don't you work with him, seeing as he's been working with you, to further your goals? You've said that the Vampire bordering you is friendly towards him, but is an overall eventual threat to the townspeople. Well, your Deathknight is Lawful Evil. Lawful Evil love to screw people over. If the Vampire Lord trusts and likes your Deathknight, let your Deathknight use and abuse that trust so that the Vampire lets down its guard and BAM, you have one less threat. Honestly you haven't really posted anything here about him being super disruptive other than "He's a different alignment and the bad guys like him." So until I see more proof as to his disruption of your game, I have to say that a different alignment is not a good reason to either force a character change or PvP.
Prator_the_Legendary 08-10-07, 03:09 PM	@Max: You're right. I completely failed to notice the large greyish button labeled "Spoiler." My bad... That said, I get the impression from his posts that he's already tried OOG diplomacy, and doesn't actually want to quit the game outright because, however bad that one character might be, he isn't directly disrupting the other characters so much that the game is no fun. Submission isn't much of an option. @Canadian: Evil characters in a good party, particularly sentient undead ones, are going to have different and probably conflicting goals than the party sooner or later, even if they do try using him to kill other evil people. "Fighting Fire with Fire" is, at based, a tactic that is as likely to get you burned even when it works.
Prelate 08-10-07, 03:14 PM	oh, there are examples of his doing stuff 'naughty'. he started a war with a neighboring ruler that nearly razed our keep and left all of our peasants/followers dead. (coincidentally, this is the same mission he was on that another of our group saw him and his nightmare in full 'evil' mode in a fight - if she tells the rest of us what she saw, that does rather force our hand, and could end the problem, potentially.) his nightmare goes on a rampage and slaughters a camp full of lumberjacks. the lone survivor conveniently can't remember what her assailant looked like (she is now in the keep with us, and has taken shelter with a priest in the group) and that is just last week ;) he is definitely facilitating some RP, but we have to turn so many blind eyes to let him not get caught, and that is what most of my issue stems from. he isn't always the most subtle guy.
Prelate 08-10-07, 03:21 PM	That said, I get the impression from his posts that he's already tried OOG diplomacy, and doesn't actually want to quit the game outright because, however bad that one character might be, he isn't directly disrupting the other characters so much that the game is no fun. indeed. the problem started with the players last character. he was playing a LN Cleric that was also half celestial. But he was acting very NE/CE and only remembered the lawful part when forced or it was convenient. the problem with this character is we have a group that is good aligned, the current group leader (myself) is LG.. he is not disruptive to the game per se, as that would be something easily remedied. I think basically he is just being selfish and disregarding what anyone else in the group is trying to do/be/RP, and pathologically tries to force every night to be about his character. This is something I plan on talkign to the DM about, privately. It is getting to the point where I feel like I will have no choice but to deal with this PVP, or retire my character to bring in one that might be more tolerant of a LE character.. which honestly I don't like doing. Hopefully the DM will not just fluff it over, as he has done in the past. It's honestly a fun group of people OOCly and we're all friends, it is just aggravating to feel 'forced' into some IC actions to prevent potential OOC issues by playing the roles some of us feel we SHOULD be taking, versus what we are lately feeling cornered into.
Prator_the_Legendary 08-12-07, 09:11 PM	I dunno what to tell ya, mate. You seem to have some pretty good ideas of what you can do as it is.
Waterhammer 08-13-07, 12:59 AM	Don't look the other way. To play your char properly, you are going to need to call you're friend's char out. Sooner, or later. You might let the player know OoC beforehand, but it's going to happen sooner, or later. In game, the evidence is already in place. You really have no choice in this matter.
bobothechimp 08-13-07, 01:23 AM	Evil doesn't necessarily mean kicking puppies and throwing helpless kittens into the rain, it can just mean that he is out for himself before others.
ServanWolf 08-13-07, 08:40 AM	and what about a neutral group with an evil meber in it..would that give problem? and for your evil guy...he could try to send dreams to the others to make them think he is good..or some suggestion spells and so on... ...and if he want kill some innocents.that he cast charm person on it without his group seeing it and them killing that guy because he begun killing innocent people :p (making an innocent act evil and kill him then..and maybe some others be accident :p )
Archon of Light 08-13-07, 01:44 PM	Truth is, your friend is, in fact, disrupting the game. The fact that you've had to post your concerns about it to get some advice should be self-evident. How many times do we read similar threads about Player X manipulating the gaming table for his own personal agenda without regard for anyone else? Sure, it might be fun for him to play the mysterious and questionable character that doesn't quite fit in with the rest of the group, but now the rest of the group must constantly work to accomodate for his own personal wants and needs in order to make this square peg fit into the round hole. From the sound of it, everything was going great until said player got bored with one character and decided to try another, which demands more attention. It may be that he was not satisfied with the amount of spotlight his last character was recieving that made him bored with it. But the rest of the group shouldn't be forced to accomodate for this new, mysterious character. Just because the person sits at the same table doesn't mean you have to accept whatever gets placed into the marching order. Characters need to have suitable and acceptable circumstances for traveling together. If the player just seems hell bent on playing this one particular idea, then perhaps you should consider having the entire party change characters for a while. Get everyone to play evil and undead-oriented characters to go along with it. Pretty soon, the spotlight might dim for this player and he'll get bored with this one, too. Then you can go back to your 'regular' campaign, but this time insist that the player needs a character better suited to interact with the group as opposed to deliberately going against the grain. You basically have two options: continue to go along with it and accomodate this player's needs, or address the problem openly as a group to come up with a better solution that includes everyone's best interest rather than the individual. No one should be expected to make compromises just for the benefit of one person in the group.
CCS 08-13-07, 07:42 PM	deathknight. (I think he got the idea, when we fought some blackguard). he said deathknights can be fleshy, and to keep himself hidden, he never takes his plate armor off. he employs a cantrip to keep us from smelling any bit of decay, and to mute the glow from his eyes. in all of those safeguards he does well.. it's weird stuff like being he passes himself off as a priest of sorts, but never offers healing, the only magic we've seen has been very much the negative type. his 'horse' (nightmare) terrifies any other mounts when it is near the stable. while we can't smell death/decay on him, the fact we never see him without full plate on is very unusual. We also never see him eat or drink (though in all honesty, he did recently tell the group he was wearing a ring of sustenance, and since he wears full plate, we wouldn't know better anyway). You're in Ravenloft. In character you KNOW about vampires, liches, etc. In character you also KNOW the power of evil in your lands. But the fact that your mystry priest doesn't eat/sleep/ever take off his armour(and never seems fatigued etc by this)/never casts any "good" magic & has a mount who panicks other animals doesn't provide you with enough evidence that SOMETHING'S WRONG??? Are you all RPing that you're in a sub-concious state of terror induced deniel? BTW, how do you explain away his mounts flaming hooves/main/tail? Or at least the light they'd give off? I think you're justified in taking action.... And if you're concerned about PVP? Try this; Let the DM kill him off. Whenever you have encounters, let the DK do the brunt of the fighting. Let him (and his mount) take most of the damage. DON'T rush in to help him, provide flanking, missle fire/melee support.... Play upon the fact that your own mount balks at coming near him. If you find youself unable to avoid helping him, pull your punches against whatevers fighting him. Don't SAY you're doing this aloud. Handle it via a note/conversation with the DM before the game. As in: If I have to fight agaisnt a monster focussed upon (DK player) I'm going to fight defensively unless also seriously threatened. That way the DM knows what to modify your #s by but the DK player just sees you being ineffective. Likewise, if you cast area effect spells, don't worry too much about wether or not you clip him with a few. Don't make an obvious practice of it, just occasionally "error" by a square or two. At some point he'll die from this style of play. Or the charade will drop - in wich case I'd suggest running.
BW0222 08-14-07, 01:22 PM	Prelate, I'm also not wanting to play the petulant sounding "take control of the player/game or I quit" card with the DM. The DM is a good friend, but is definitely on the more lazy side when it comes to controlling players with strong personality types. But... it is always going to come down to that. Either: a) you are going to spend your time roleplaying stupid and accept whatever he dishes out to you and the group, or b) someone is going to have to leave the game. All the advice, so far, leads to this, and typically just delays one of these choices. 1. Going after his character. Gee... he'll go back after you and eventually one of you will die, right? 2. Letting each other die. Stop covering his back in hope he'll die and he'll do the same to you. Eventually someone will die? 3. Start acting suspicious. So? You find out he is evil. So? Now what? It doesn't solve the issue. Either one of you is going to leave the campaign... or you play stupid and continue adventuring with him. 4. Talk to the player. (Good advice) but if he refuses to make a new character, or makes an equally obnixious character, your choices remain a) or b). Slight chance he'll figure this out, but likely not without the threat of b). The reality is he is playing a game of chicken. He is betting that you will never take the b) option, so he can force a) on you. "I can mess with your characters and ruin the enjoyment of the rest of the players, because your only option is to quit or kick me out of the game." IMO, both your fault and the DMs for allowing evil. At the start of the game you should be clear "No evil or anti-party character." If the other players vote for allowing evil then you can make your a) and b) choice then and there. Otherwise it isn't an issue. However, the two questions now are... Are you enjoy playing the game with someone who knowningly makes the game unfun for the rest of you? If your only options are to play as you are now or to force one of you to leave the campaign, which would you prefer? Personally, I'd ask for a group vote to end the campaign. Let everyone know that you aren't enjoying it. Ask that the next campaign have a "no evil, no anti-party PCs" rule. If not, walk. No evil is a reasonable "take it or leave it" condition on a campaign. "I get to make other players not have fun" is not a reasonable "take it or leave it" condition.
Prelate 08-16-07, 02:12 PM	unfortunately the question is moot for awhile.. said player was in a pretty bad motorcycle accident, and will most likely be a good while before he rejoins us. All said and done, I think I'm going to have a conversation with him and the DM, and let them know that the blind eye is going off, and if the DM will not resolve the issue, then I will have to. I pretty much knew where I was going before I started, but it is always helpful to see feedback from others. Thanks all for the feedback! :)