Experiences with parties of mixed alignments [Archive] - Wizards Community

Experiences with parties of mixed alignments [Archive] - Wizards Community

Post/Author/DateTime Post
Shadow080
11-30-04, 04:29 PM I'm thinking of starting a new character (Male, Tiefling, LE, Wizard, Deity: Shar). However, since the party I play with has mainly Good alignments, I am wary about potential conflicts. Can you please share your experiences with parties of mixed alignments, such as the one I have just mentioned, and perhaps give me some advice.
Melpomene
11-30-04, 04:33 PM Well, I'm going to go with cop-out answer +1:
"Talk it out with your DM/Group."
ShadowDragon8685
11-30-04, 04:34 PM My experiances with radical alignment opposition like that, most notably the G and E differences, means that it winds up in a PvP fight to the death...

That, or a Helm of Opposite Alignment.
Aeromus
11-30-04, 05:56 PM If there is no paladin and you don't openly dispute thier leadership, and actions, after all you are "lawful evil" then thier are no problems.

In other words play the friend card, notthe alignment card.

If you would trust them to adventure with you, then play it out.
Dragonspirit
11-30-04, 06:58 PM It's hard to do.

I find it hard enough to mix neutrals with good. They find themselves being thrown as projectiles by the half-orc barbarian, after attempting to drown the half-elf bard for questioning their strategy. :)
Thorak
11-30-04, 10:16 PM LE can work great in a Good party. Just realize that the party are your friends (yes, evil people have friends) and allies, you've invested far too much time getting to know them and getting them to trust you to throw that away for a trinket or two, and especially as a Wizard, having a whole big group of good-hearted guys who want to keep you alive is a heck of a lot more conducive to survival than traveling alone. Besides, you get more loot as a party, even after divvying, than you could alone, and since not everyone's a wizard, their share is likely to be stuff you care less about anyway.

Plenty of good reasons for evil to work with good. You just have to find the common cause.
devinmdp
11-30-04, 10:39 PM Must you?

Really...that'd be my attitude as a DM. It's difficult enough DMing without having to spend time and effort sorting out intra-party conflicts. These are rarely fun for the players, except for the troublemaker with the conflicting alignment.

As a longtime DM, I will venture to speak for your DM and say give the poor guy a break! Play a different character.

Devin
Skojar
11-30-04, 11:40 PM I've never had a problem doing this, unless some of the players (you or others) is unalbe to let go of the 'must do evil' idea. Being an evil character in a good party is easy. You won't feel guilty about following along, and the worst opinion you'll have of the 'good' way is that it's stupid.

What's difficult is figuring out a way for the less tolerant alignments to accept you. There are a number of solutions, but the best I've found are:

Trickery: You fool the others, or somehow conceal your nature. Unfortunately this usually ends up bad evenutally.

Laissez Faire: The Dont ask, Dont tell approach. This is easily doable with a CG party. Unless you try to tyrannize them or others, they shouldn't feel obligated to be in conflict with you.

Geas: Im currently in a game in which I play a Chaotic Neutral Bard Demigod. Ironically, my closest companion is the epic high cleric of my Lawful Neutral counterpart. This works because 1)we as players want it to work, and 2) his character has been instructed to keep tabs on me but not to start a conflict. I spend most of my game getting NPCs to ridicule him and his god, and he spends his game trying to keep a grip on the chaos. He makes a good straight man, and really shines when we engage in combat (I'm incorporeal and a bard, so I can't really do much of anything in combat, even with divine rank)

Sorry I got carried away. Basically, if your characters can't work out an understanding (for example, if one of them is a Paladin), then talk it over with the player and DM and try to find a reason for him to tolerate you. Just remember: you're character will probably benefit from associating with them, and there's no reason why he wouldn't be fine with it. The trouble is going to be figuring out how the LG members of the party deal with it.
Shadow080
12-01-04, 01:44 AM Thanks for your responses.

My Tiefling will probably have the discreet in-the-shadows kind of personality which shouldn't clash too much with the others in the party. Also, I highly doubt that there will be any paladins.
Dragonspirit
12-01-04, 02:45 AM As long as you don't try to disrupt the good guys from their missions, you should be fine. No blood sacrifices of the Druid's pet cheetah or burning down the Tiny Tim Hard Knock Orphanage, and things should be ok.
Stuntman
12-01-04, 10:37 AM I played in a good party that had a non-good, possibly evil (I'm not absolutely sure, but I think he was evil) gnome illusionist in our party. The gnome player played it really well. He was smart in that he wouldn't openly do any evil acts and would tag along. He knew that he depended on the rest of his party for security, so he had to go along. Any evil acts that he would do, he would do discretely and he made sure that it didn't affect our party's main goals. It certainly wasn't anywhere close to PvP. I think his goals were more or less independent of the party's goals, so we didn't have any conflicts with him being around.

I think it is possible as long as all players and the DM are mature about it. Still, it won't be easy.
Aeromus
12-01-04, 11:36 AM I made an evil npc once Paladin 6 Blackguard 3 to challenge my party, which contained a Paladin, and a CN (Chaotic Dumb*****) rogue.

When the PC's got to the end and met the BBEG, the rogue popped off at the mouth, about rhe Paladin needing to smite the "oh so evil man, in the shiney plate armor.." Followed by the BBEG giving a lecture about why you should respect the Paladin, his devotion ect. Needless to say the rogue died horribly, followed by the wizard, then the Paladin finally landed a crit taking the BBEG down.

Sometimes it's just outlook on the world.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
Shadow080 11-30-04, 04:29 PM	I'm thinking of starting a new character (Male, Tiefling, LE, Wizard, Deity: Shar). However, since the party I play with has mainly Good alignments, I am wary about potential conflicts. Can you please share your experiences with parties of mixed alignments, such as the one I have just mentioned, and perhaps give me some advice.
Melpomene 11-30-04, 04:33 PM	Well, I'm going to go with cop-out answer +1: "Talk it out with your DM/Group."
ShadowDragon8685 11-30-04, 04:34 PM	My experiances with radical alignment opposition like that, most notably the G and E differences, means that it winds up in a PvP fight to the death... That, or a Helm of Opposite Alignment.
Aeromus 11-30-04, 05:56 PM	If there is no paladin and you don't openly dispute thier leadership, and actions, after all you are "lawful evil" then thier are no problems. In other words play the friend card, notthe alignment card. If you would trust them to adventure with you, then play it out.
Dragonspirit 11-30-04, 06:58 PM	It's hard to do. I find it hard enough to mix neutrals with good. They find themselves being thrown as projectiles by the half-orc barbarian, after attempting to drown the half-elf bard for questioning their strategy. :)
Thorak 11-30-04, 10:16 PM	LE can work great in a Good party. Just realize that the party are your friends (yes, evil people have friends) and allies, you've invested far too much time getting to know them and getting them to trust you to throw that away for a trinket or two, and especially as a Wizard, having a whole big group of good-hearted guys who want to keep you alive is a heck of a lot more conducive to survival than traveling alone. Besides, you get more loot as a party, even after divvying, than you could alone, and since not everyone's a wizard, their share is likely to be stuff you care less about anyway. Plenty of good reasons for evil to work with good. You just have to find the common cause.
devinmdp 11-30-04, 10:39 PM	Must you? Really...that'd be my attitude as a DM. It's difficult enough DMing without having to spend time and effort sorting out intra-party conflicts. These are rarely fun for the players, except for the troublemaker with the conflicting alignment. As a longtime DM, I will venture to speak for your DM and say give the poor guy a break! Play a different character. Devin
Skojar 11-30-04, 11:40 PM	I've never had a problem doing this, unless some of the players (you or others) is unalbe to let go of the 'must do evil' idea. Being an evil character in a good party is easy. You won't feel guilty about following along, and the worst opinion you'll have of the 'good' way is that it's stupid. What's difficult is figuring out a way for the less tolerant alignments to accept you. There are a number of solutions, but the best I've found are: Trickery: You fool the others, or somehow conceal your nature. Unfortunately this usually ends up bad evenutally. Laissez Faire: The Dont ask, Dont tell approach. This is easily doable with a CG party. Unless you try to tyrannize them or others, they shouldn't feel obligated to be in conflict with you. Geas: Im currently in a game in which I play a Chaotic Neutral Bard Demigod. Ironically, my closest companion is the epic high cleric of my Lawful Neutral counterpart. This works because 1)we as players want it to work, and 2) his character has been instructed to keep tabs on me but not to start a conflict. I spend most of my game getting NPCs to ridicule him and his god, and he spends his game trying to keep a grip on the chaos. He makes a good straight man, and really shines when we engage in combat (I'm incorporeal and a bard, so I can't really do much of anything in combat, even with divine rank) Sorry I got carried away. Basically, if your characters can't work out an understanding (for example, if one of them is a Paladin), then talk it over with the player and DM and try to find a reason for him to tolerate you. Just remember: you're character will probably benefit from associating with them, and there's no reason why he wouldn't be fine with it. The trouble is going to be figuring out how the LG members of the party deal with it.
Shadow080 12-01-04, 01:44 AM	Thanks for your responses. My Tiefling will probably have the discreet in-the-shadows kind of personality which shouldn't clash too much with the others in the party. Also, I highly doubt that there will be any paladins.
Dragonspirit 12-01-04, 02:45 AM	As long as you don't try to disrupt the good guys from their missions, you should be fine. No blood sacrifices of the Druid's pet cheetah or burning down the Tiny Tim Hard Knock Orphanage, and things should be ok.
Stuntman 12-01-04, 10:37 AM	I played in a good party that had a non-good, possibly evil (I'm not absolutely sure, but I think he was evil) gnome illusionist in our party. The gnome player played it really well. He was smart in that he wouldn't openly do any evil acts and would tag along. He knew that he depended on the rest of his party for security, so he had to go along. Any evil acts that he would do, he would do discretely and he made sure that it didn't affect our party's main goals. It certainly wasn't anywhere close to PvP. I think his goals were more or less independent of the party's goals, so we didn't have any conflicts with him being around. I think it is possible as long as all players and the DM are mature about it. Still, it won't be easy.
Aeromus 12-01-04, 11:36 AM	I made an evil npc once Paladin 6 Blackguard 3 to challenge my party, which contained a Paladin, and a CN (Chaotic Dumb*****) rogue. When the PC's got to the end and met the BBEG, the rogue popped off at the mouth, about rhe Paladin needing to smite the "oh so evil man, in the shiney plate armor.." Followed by the BBEG giving a lecture about why you should respect the Paladin, his devotion ect. Needless to say the rogue died horribly, followed by the wizard, then the Paladin finally landed a crit taking the BBEG down. Sometimes it's just outlook on the world.