Post/Author/DateTime	Post
KillerVole 01-29-07, 10:04 PM	Hello everyone. I am the DM for the good half of a D&D club. The DM of the evil half has proposed a plotline in which the good characters and the evil characters ally for a time in the face of a larger threat. Both sides control villages, somewhat near an area where big nasties could come from. What I need is advice on keeping the groups from killing each other. The good group outnumbers the veil group 3-1, and includes 2 paladins. The groups would not be teaming up, per se, but more aiding each other in the face of a common enemy. My only concern is getting the evil group enough time to explain this. It includes an undead, and the paladins can be a bit slash happy toward monsters. Any advice will be appreciated. Thanks!
KillerVole 01-29-07, 10:05 PM	Oops, my computer posted this in the player section. Copuld a mod move it to the "What's a DM to do?" board? Thanks!
Callista 01-30-07, 09:06 AM	Okay, the possible problems. 1. The Paladins. (Aren't they always?) These characters are not only forbidden to team up with Evil, but would probably not want to do so. Just how closely would "aiding each other" mean they'd be working? You and the other DM need to work together to make sure that the Paladins' consciences are OK with it, and that their players aren't forced to have their characters leave the party. 2. CE characters. Are there any? Impulsive, evil characters may decide they don't like one or more of the Good characters and attempt murder, resulting in a lot of trouble. If there are CE characters, they need to be shown that it's to their benefit not to kill people, even if they are annoying goody-two-shoes. 3. Preventing an all-out battle between the two sides. You've already got one thing working for you here: The evil side is outnumbered. They'll have fewer compunctions about killing; but they're also pragmatic enough to know that if they start anything, they're dead. The Good side is going to be the problem here: How pragmatic are *they*? I'm guessing, if you've got two paladins... not very. It needs to be made clear, somehow, to the Good characters, that the Evil team has got something they need to Save The World (or whatever)--something they have to work with them for. Maybe it's a skill, or a prophecy, resources, social connections... Whatever the Evil guys have, the good guys need it; so they have to play nice until then. 4. Are the players mature enough not to provoke deliberate PvP battles, or, worse, assassinations? If they aren't, it won't work; if they are, lay down some ground rules: Any player whose character is thinking about attacking another PC needs to warn the other player (though not their PC) and the DM, so that anything necessary to keep the story going can be done (and, if necessary, a new character can be rolled up).
Morwen 01-30-07, 09:17 AM	In a best case scenario, both groups should be mainly composed of Lawful characters. That way, any really major Chaotic threat would be something both groups would want to deal with, and they should realize that they'd need to work together to accomplish that. As for the Paladins.. Even Angels and Devils sometimes work together to deal with the forces of Chaos, so if the threat is major enough, their Code should not necessarily prevent them from working with evil characters. Although asking them to fight side-by-side would probably be too much. I suggest trying to have the non-Paladins act as liaisons, at least until some working order between the two groups is established.
Zandolit 01-30-07, 01:46 PM	Situations like this actually can work, with a few steps taken to ensure things go as well as possible. First of all, you're going to have to house rule things so the paladins are allowed to work with evil characters for the greater good. I know that eliminates some role play challenges, but in this case without doing so you're pretty much giving the paladins an impossible task, which should be avoided for the players' sake. Another thing that's absolutely crucial is you have to keep the characters busy! I'm not saying railroad them, but throw enough stuff at them that they're not getting much downtime. Ordinarily it's fun to send the characters off without much direction and see what sort of things they're going to get into, but in a situation like this the nearest thing to get into is attacking each other. You can go a long way toward preventing intra-group fighting by not putting the characters in a position where they have to find their own stuff to do. By all means give them options, but make the options such they have to get involved in something. A word of warning, though: This is not going to be an easy situation for your characters... or players. In my experience mixed good/evil parties can work, but there's a whole different dynamic. Best case scenario, you lose the trust you've built up within a more cohesive team. At least at first, characters will be as distrustful of their own teammates as enemies, will constantly watch their own backs, and will be less likely to take risks for one another. Worst case scenario, the two halves of the team will decide to work at cross-purposes just because they can (even if facing a greater threat, especially if you have Chaotic characters played according to the "do absolutely whatever" stereotype,) sometimes with one half constantly undoing the other half's efforts. Interesting story-wise, yes, but often not particularly fun when some players have spent significant time and thought carefully setting stuff up for the good of everyone, only to have it knocked down in the last few minutes of play, often for no good reason other than "that's my alignment." I have to say, as a player that's incredibly frustrating and not much fun. Wasted effort is not a good feeling in or out of game, and wasting the party's energy on us versus them internal stuff can really derail a storyline. Be aware of that, and if things seem to be going that way and people seem unhappy with it, try to guide things in a more positive direction. (If everyone seems to be enjoying it, though, they may as well go for it. It's just not fun if a few party members are getting sabotaged for no reason.) Bottom line: Make sure this is something your players are comfortable with. Ask them... don't tell them... about your plan. Make sure everyone is onboard. That goes even for Neutral characters you don't expect will get caught up in any potential alignment wars, because party dynamic affects everyone, even those not directly involved in a given conflict. If you intend them to work together, indicate that, although understand they have every right to choose not to do so. If you're willing to let them battle it out within the combined party, make that clear, because many players are likely to find it less fun and should know what they're getting into. Good luck. :)
Tzor 01-30-07, 03:42 PM	The Paladin is the biggest problem to "working together," although technically you can have common goals and not even be aware of it. The generalguiding principle is the assumption that no player has "stupid" in their alignment. Even evil characters understand self preservation (in fact evil ones more than good ones since they are all about themselves) so when there is the greater threat, wasting ones time instead of trying to prevent the greater threat to themselves is stupid. Good also see the greater threat to others as their first priority. The problem is when the greater threat is removed. That may require a little cooperative railroding. :P
Vaalingrade Ashland 01-30-07, 03:45 PM	Allow the loser-- er.. Paladins to pre-atone for working with the evil guys.