Post/Author/DateTime	Post
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 10:52 AM	we were fighting a vampire. he dominated our dwarf tank, so he started subduing our rogue. the rogue starts swinging back, for damage, might i add. i got dom'd, and i was asked to grapple the rogue to protect my dwarvan ally. mind you, everybody knew the vamp was controlling our minds. anyways, the rogue takes an attack of op against me, crits, rolls 100%, and cuts my head off. the rogue is supposed to b good alligned, too. wouldn't the "good" thing to do b try and subdue back, or mayb go full defensive. how about full retreat, and just let us chase him around, while the rest of the party take out the vampire. i also think the dm should have brought up the allignment card, and stopped him from doing hp damage. at the very least, he should definitely have an allignment change. that brings up another point of mine, and it's just personal preference, that i definitely do not want to b in any compaign with anything other than good characters. as long as they are played correctly. i don't care what spell or ability i am under, no good party member should b trying to cut my head off. am i wrong? mayb i just don't know how to play d&d. i don't know. i was, and still am, pretty ******. thoughts?
bob_the_great 03-21-07, 11:06 AM	the good thing is that this scenario doesn't come up very often. it does sound like you might not be compatible with the rogue player. I'm the same way in that I like playing in a good party. unless the rogue player otherwise causes you problems i'd suggest giving yourself a week to get over it before doing anything rash like quitting the game. attacking an ally with deadly force is a no-no. if you're dominated you have no choice so you're forgiven. if your ally is dominated you try to subdue him, cure him of his dominated status, or take out the guy dominating him. i would like to point out though that a crappy houserule is partly at fault here. without the stupid crit table he doesn't kill you with one hit.
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 11:10 AM	crit chart, ftfl.
Wayside 03-21-07, 11:11 AM	Yeah, that rogue is nuetral at best. We had a similar situation once in a group i played in.Our group consisted of myself, a bounty hunter, another fighter type, a Paladin *rolls eyes*, and a couple other characters i don't recall. We were trying to work our way into an undead complex and every time we came out with huge losses and undead on our tails (ability drain and disease type losses). So myself, the bounty hunter and the other fighter decided we didn't want to go there anymore. but the other half of the group under close reign of the paladin insisted we continue on (The paladin was a paladin of Tyr, his interpretation lead him to be the biggest jackass of a character i've ever seen, he would willingly turn in any player for prosecution if, say they abandoned the job they were sent to do, stole something, etc...). So we aggreed to knock them deeply unconscious in their sleep so we could get a good head start away from the group. The DM asked us all to write wether we were doing subdual or real damage on a note and pass it to him. The fighter cut off the paladins head, and the bounty hunter not wanting the rest of the group to be able to turn us in, killed the other two players. 3 people lost their characters AND the campaign ended because everyone was so frustrated.
Lindwyrm 03-21-07, 11:13 AM	The thing with the vampire is harsh. However, remember that you have just temporarily joined the bad guys side, so from a character point of view attacking is reasonable. However, as you are allies normally, attacking at -4 for subdual damage would be reasonable unless he doesn't think he can hit at all if he takes the penalty. In this case, he has to hope he just drops you to unconcious. Also, it appears you have a different critical system in use to the core one. Normally you do multiplied damage (not counting sneak attack bonuses etc.), so it should be difficult to kill you in a single hit unless you are really squishy. What does your party have in it? Does it have anyone who could have cast protection from (alignmnent)? If so this would have stopped the mind control effect. On another line of thought, as you were working towards the vampire, were you subduing all his living minions? If not, then you can't really complain if one of your party pulls out lethal damage when the party are affected.
Thulsa Doom 03-21-07, 11:13 AM	Yeah, that rogue kinda killed your PC for nothing...and he should have an alignment change... As to not playing in any games with any other characters besides good, i think that's just lame... A PC's alignment does not determine a player's reaction (as seen in your example ), it is merely a guideline as to how a character is supposed to behave...so there isn't anything forcing a CE PC to kill yours, nor is anything stopping him from helping your character...because anyone, no matter how big their killing desire is, isn't gonna kill anyone who makes them stronger or is useful to them...he could be killing NPC's just for the fun of it, but other PC's is where he should draw the line...
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 11:15 AM	the rest of the party should act accordingly now, too. they should b very wary of him, mayb even seperate themselves from the rogue. you know, if anybody wanted to actually role play. and if he doesn't f'n change his allignment after that...
FntsyWlkr 03-21-07, 11:29 AM	... I don't see the major issue being the rogue's alignment (he is in survival mode. Fighting a vampire ...) I see the major issue being the DM dominating your characters. I see, the value of dominate, but the DM put you in that position. Who do you think was next to be dominated? I just don't like when DM's paralyze, sleep, dominate ... a character. Because then you're not playing anymore! You're watching.
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 11:31 AM	As to not playing in any games with any other characters besides good, i think that's just lame... yeah, that's probly just me continuing to vent. i guess i can just make a nuetral character and have the option to do the same thing. that's just not me though.
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 11:35 AM	... I don't see the major issue being the rogue's alignment (he is in survival mode. Fighting a vampire ...) meh. he is supposedly alligned x/good, and there are a ton of things he could have done in contrast to cutting my head off.
couchmonkey 03-21-07, 11:47 AM	Talk with your DM about repurcussions. The rogue should have to deal with his own actions. 1. The rogue could go on and not take responsibility for its actions. In this case the rogue's alignment shifts to neutral evil causing alienation from the party. He can run afoul of the local paladin order, get stalked by an inevitable and your character can be reanimated as a vengeful undead monster. 2. The rogue can show remorse and take the financial burden of your character's resurrection. If you are going to be penalized by losing a level then the rogues wealth should take a permanet hit. I hate it when PCs kill fellow party members for nothing and before consulting the other player. Party unity should come first so that everyone can have a good time. These two options should stress that.
Archangel62 03-21-07, 11:47 AM	meh. he is supposedly alligned x/good, and there are a ton of things he could have done in contrast to cutting my head off. True, but this is actual play experience, I've lost characters due to domination related actions. If you were the tank the rogue might not have been able to hit you if he tried for subdual, the modified critical chart here is at least partially to blame for the incident. It's why many of my casters tend to be cripplers rather than destroyers.
PhaedrusXY 03-21-07, 12:03 PM	crit chart, ftfl.I think that is the main problem, here. Talk to your DM about getting rid of that stupid houserule. He doesn't sound too unreasonable, since he was having the dominated members use non-lethal force. He could have been much nastier and made you use lethal.
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 12:24 PM	wut is wrong with just going full defensive? it would have taken us awhile to hit, if ever. the dwarf was trying to subdue him, so right there is a -8 to hit swing.
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 12:26 PM	i really like the choice between being alienated for this or taking responsibility in bringing me back. i didn't love this character, but it's the principle of it.
IceFractal 03-21-07, 12:36 PM	Well, the problem with just stalling is that Dominate Person lasts one day per level, that's a long time to be running in circles. Sure, the vampire did get defeated in this case, but that's not guaranteed - it could have simply retreated and let you kill each-other. Furthermore, knocked out, at the mercy of a vampire = tasty snack for later. Actually, there's a fairly common strategy, which is to do a couple hits subdual, then the rest lethal, because in all likelyhood that will guarantee a knockout before a kill. Of course, that doesn't work when you have a crit chart with "decapitate" on it. For a rogue in particular, you can't get a sneak attack when doing nonlethal, unless you have a sap. Now definitely there were better ways to handle it, but fighting back with full force is not an unreasonable decision when increasingly outnumbered. Really, dominate is just a problematic spell when used against the players.
was_fired 03-21-07, 12:42 PM	I don't see that the rogue did anything wrong at all in this case. Sure he's good but he was in a critical situation and he had to do it to survive. There are what four people in your group? If so that means that half of the party was under the vampire's control and more might end up being commanded. Also lets look at the odds here the rogue had three enemies (including the vampire) and only only ally. If he went on a full defensive he would have ended up dead in the end (or at least dominated by the vampire) so once again he had no choice. Also don't forget that dominate person lasts for DAYS if he hadn't fought back then you would have had all the time in the world to subdue his ass. Finally luck of the dice ought not determine alignment. He got a critical hit and ended up landing something on the DM's custom chart that results in your decapitation. That really wasn't his fault as the odds were under 1% putting it well within the range of a highly unfortunate accident and out of the malice intended zone.
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 01:15 PM	we also had a cleric, paladdin, and a wizard. the dwarf made his will save against pro evil. there u go, 3 guys on the vampire. rogue just had to stall.
Disciple_of_Juiblex 03-21-07, 01:34 PM	Im sorry that you died ... however i still dont see the rogue getting punished. sure the rest of the party shouldent be happy with him but who knows what the vamp could have done next. should he really be punished for a bad roll? what if he was dominated and crit/killed you? would you still be upset? What if he had to jump to save you from a monser, failed the jump, falling into a pit taking some damage and you died before he got back up? I dont see his alignment taking a hit either. he could be remorseful about his actions and try to justify it " i swung wildly in self defence, who know he would have twisted his body like that in the last second!" He could pay for your resserection, or try to take up your financial burdians. but unless he does something deliberate he shouldent change alignments
jnrhayz 03-21-07, 01:57 PM	I have to agree with most people that the rogue PLAYER is not to blame here. He was doing what he thought his character would do in that situation. I played a rogue and if the fighter was grappling me and I am just fighting for my perceived survival I would be attacking anyone coming at me with full force also. You are dominated and would probably be using full force against me. You got a bad roll, which probably only stinks because it was from another player. Cool off and relax. Maybe miss the next game and then see what you want to do from there.
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 01:58 PM	i just don't see it.
couchmonkey 03-21-07, 02:01 PM	I dont see his alignment taking a hit either. he could be remorseful about his actions and try to justify it " i swung wildly in self defence, who know he would have twisted his body like that in the last second!" He could pay for your resserection, or try to take up your financial burdians. but unless he does something deliberate he shouldent change alignments Perhaps my first option was a bit hastey but I do think this should be RP'd to gauge the Rogues feelings on this. The amount of Apathy/Sympathy he displays should be an indicator of his allignment. If he doesn't seem to care then he is, at best, true nuetral, possibly chaotic. If he appears to have any amount of satisfaction with the deed he floats towards evil. If he really is playing a good character he should do everything in his power to fix this mistake. This could, very well, be a good opening for a fun Bring-Friend-Back-From-The-Dead-Sidequest that could potentially strengthen the bond between these two characters. Maybe even grant a Teamwork Bonus feat to them for a gold/exp price. I don't know, this could easily turn positive with the DM's cooperation. And, yeah, talk to your DM about getting rid of his Crit Chart.
TheBigShow 03-21-07, 02:31 PM	there was only amusement when this happened.
Orcdoubleax 03-21-07, 02:33 PM	Is the rogue wrong? yes. To so quickly abandom a companion without even trying to not kill them is not in anyway realistic. If he cared so little for his travelling companions I would argue that he would have a hard time even being considered netural. Is there much to be done about it. No. Shake it off. Make a new Character and let it go. For those that think the rogue didn't wrong I would argue that you don't understand a good alignment. Maybe your own alignment isn't quite all it can be. :P
danielinthewolvesden 03-21-07, 02:58 PM	anyways, the rogue takes an attack of op against me, crits, rolls 100%, and cuts my head off. ? The problem here is the silly crit chart rather than playing the RULES. But Yes, your DM should not have a mixed alignment party.
Tyraxus 03-21-07, 03:16 PM	Remember that alignment doesn't dictate what a character does and does not do, it's a descriptor. Just like a LG alignment won't stop a Paladin from falling, an XG alignment won't stop someone from making an AoO on an ally. So the DM definitely was correct to not change the Rogue's attack to nonlethal (and that's without getting into the whole "DM runs the world, but the player runs the character" can of worms). As far as you being ticked... yeah, you're ticked. Your character got killed because he was dominated and the Rogue rolled well on the AoO. It happens. PCs are not and should not be invincible. Should the Rogue have used nonlethal force? Obviously the player didn't think so, and it's his character, so that's not even a valid question, since it's the player's character. I find it interesting that you're mad enough over this incident to contemplate quitting the game. Have there been other things bothering you about this game? Or are you just upset that "The rogue's player did something I wouldn't have"? If it's the former, you need to think about what else is bothering you and address those issues. If it's the latter, you need to suck it up and realize that everybody doesn't think like you. Find a new group if you're not having fun with this one, since that's the point of the game, but getting all upset because someone else's playstyle isn't 100% like yours, or their idea for their character doesn't match what you think their character would do will do nothing but upset you needlessly. As far as what should happen... well, you said he was amused. Do you mean the player or the character? I know I've been amused by some of the things that happen to other players' characters (a great many of which I've been involved in, as well), but the CHARACTER responded differently. I've never cut anybody's head off, but I'm willing to bet I'd crack some kind of OOC joke about it. Doesn't mean my character suddenly went from CG to NE. It's all about what the character does.
DarkNick 03-21-07, 05:01 PM	Yeah, it is frustrating when you get dominated. Are you really angry at that player or the whole situation of being dominated? Personally I think you should forgive the rogue guy. It was a desperate situation, he decided to do lethal damage. Possibly he thought that was the quickest way of dealing with you and did not think he would kill you. Slap him on the back and say "damn, that's some good killing. Next time try hitting our opponants for once" Roll up a new character..
FeceMan 03-21-07, 09:13 PM	How about it wasn't the rogue's fault, as he didn't try to roll 100% on the crit chart, but it was the DM's fault for being dumb and having a crit chart?
Daydreamer 03-22-07, 02:45 AM	... I don't see the major issue being the rogue's alignment (he is in survival mode. Fighting a vampire ...) I see the major issue being the DM dominating your characters. I see, the value of dominate, but the DM put you in that position. Who do you think was next to be dominated? I just don't like when DM's paralyze, sleep, dominate ... a character. Because then you're not playing anymore! You're watching. do you like it when your knocked unconscious, or killed? Then your just watching also. The effects are really no different than that in terms of impact, they are agravating, but part of the game if the dm is to have credibility. though i dont know enough about the ops fellow players and dms to make a judgement of this specific instance. id be very annoyed at 1. the house critical rule. 2. if the pc himself opted to such a violent act, without the dm saying hes doing that bc hes dominated. those two would make me very volatile as well.
Redclock_the_Untimely 03-22-07, 04:06 AM	I recently was in a situation where my group's high AC fighter failed a save on Insanity and began attacking the party for lethal damage. While the other party members with full BAB used nonlethal damage to attempt to subdue him, they were making little progress until I, the rogue, used lethal with sneak to do serious damage. I didn't knock him out, but that made it much easier for the others to do so. (One more hit did that.) The success rate for the nonlethal attacks was about 1 in 7 while the insane fighter was hitting about 3 out of 4. We could have lost a party member if the insane character hadn't stood around for two rounds because of lucky random rolling. Afterwards the party decided I needed a blackjack in case something similar happened. The main culprit is the crit table and as others have said, ask your DM to get rid of it. Beyond that, when you buy items for your new character, buy a sap for the party rogue and make sure the rogue has one in all future games, whoever is playing that role. You should definitely give the rogue flak about doing more damage to a party member than the enemy and remind him that turnabout is fair play. ;)
TheBigShow 03-22-07, 07:53 AM	in character, i don't know how the rogue and the rest of the party will react. they stopped right there, pretty much. they might surprise me, if i make a stink about this. if i don't, i doubt they'll do anything. nice role-playing right there. there were a billion ways of surviving the situation. the rogue acted like an idiot. if u r rolling lethal damage, and u know the rules of the crit chart, then u need to take responsibility. in other words, he was trying to cut my head off. that's the way i see that. of course u can play your character how u want; it's your character afterall. allignment change should definitely b looked at, if he doesn't repent. the party should really look at this character with a different aura now, however. overall, it is a sloppy group of players. they don't role-play very well, and there are some that cannot do simple math and basically make up attack rolls and such. i am very ****, and a stickler, which obviously is a problem. this is the best i got though.
Disciple_of_Juiblex 03-22-07, 09:28 AM	, i doubt they'll do anything. nice role-playing right there. the rogue acted like an idiot. if u r rolling lethal damage, and u know the rules of the crit chart, then u need to take responsibility. in other words, he was trying to cut my head off. that's the way i see that. overall, it is a sloppy group of players. they don't role-play very well, and there are some that cannot do simple math and basically make up attack rolls and such. i am very ****, and a stickler, which obviously is a problem. this is the best i got though. Im not trying to attack you, but after reading many of your posts you just seem to be angry at the rogue, and you want validation. Look, he decided you attack you, as you where going to hurt him. He said "bob the fighter who has more armor than me is looking at me with an evil glare. i know i cant fight him in a strait up battle. his armor is to high so i cant afford to hit and miss on a non-lethal attack. im going to do lethal becuse othrwise i cant hit him, hopefuly i can take him into the negitives. Crap a crit. Double Crap a 100%". I dont see it as "Ya, bob is a jerk i have what a 1 in a hundred chance to kill him instantly if i roll a crit so im going to give my dice the lucky roll and pray that i pull it off." Look. take a few days to cool off. force the issue from your head. the try to re look at the problem. it sounds more like this problem with your group has been building for a bit, and this was the last straw so to speek. Then decide if you want to go back to them or not.
Forgember 03-22-07, 10:20 AM	I think the rogue over reacted a bit personally. He had a Dwarf fighter attacking him for subdual and another ally come in to grapple him. Could he have even been grappled? Most thieves can get out of grapples pretty easy I think. In any event he had two ally combatants against him who where both not trying to kill him. He chose to try and kill or saverly injure one of his team mates, to me thats not being a "good" guy and its certainly not being a team player. As for what to do about it now thats up to the DM, If I where him I would have that little murder leaked out to some City officials. I also agree that the Crit table should be takin out, though I can see how it would be fun as long as your not attacking yourselves.
TheBigShow 03-22-07, 11:35 AM	yeah, i definitely think the this guy was playin like a retard; he usually does. considering he works at the shop and plays in every compaign anybody runs there, yeah, i might have to quit. obviously, i am going to have a talk with him and the rest of the party/dm, then see wut they do.
UAMDB 03-22-07, 01:23 PM	yeah, i definitely think the this guy was playin like a retard; he usually does. considering he works at the shop and plays in every compaign anybody runs there, yeah, i might have to quit. obviously, i am going to have a talk with him and the rest of the party/dm, then see wut they do. You want some more cheese to go with your whine? Your character died. Get over it. Something I dont think you have done yet is put yourself in the rogues shoes. You walk into a room and see a very powerful undead creature, that controls others, and feeds off of their bodies. All of a sudden two of your party members start attacking you. You could stall, and probly get knocked unconscience.....hmm Lets think about what might happen to you then. Tied up by a vampire, nope nothing bad could happen from that situation. It would be metagaming to go, "Hey that spell only last X mins because thats what the Monsters Manual says." Also how many times has this character run into Vampires. If never what is your ranks in Knowledge(X). How many times have you seen someone get Dominated? If you have never ran accross this then all you know is that two party members just turned on you. The fact that they are using subdual damage is pointless. They might need you alive for a sacrifice. You dont know. I'm sorry I find it very hard to belive that you would not have done everything in your power to keep yourself alive. And yes that means using lethal force.
ShadowDragon8685 03-22-07, 01:38 PM	The rogue acted more than reasonably. You're the one who's getting bent out of shape. YOU failed the roll and forced him to put his weak, 3/4ths BAB, lightly-armored self in the position of defending himself from a strong, 1:1 BAB, heavily-armored fighter. YES, he's going to strike for Lethal damage. He's going to do whatever he can to save himself from your apparently-treasonous self. That he managed to roll a less than 1% chance of decapitating your character is random chance, suck it up. Get rezzed if the party rezzes you, make a new character if they don't. And the new character should have a Ring of Protection from Evil, continious effect. Guess what? 6,000 GP. No more worrying about being Dominated or possessed.
TheBigShow 03-22-07, 03:27 PM	bah. i haven't really given a crap when any of my other characters died. this is the first. we are 4th level. i have a +7 ab; he has a +10. i only have a 19 ac, too.
ToxicWiz 03-22-07, 04:29 PM	I'm sorry... but are you mad at the rogue for rolling a crit? This is just the way I see it. Fighter is dominated, subdual all round. combats probably looking dicey at this point, so rogue will lethal fighter down. fighter will stabilise anyway, right? then he crits. uh-oh. Decapitation. Big screw-up. Get rezzed or get a new character. no big deal. sort out a routine for repeat incidents. Is that ring really so much to stretch for? couldn't you just ask him not to hit you so hard next time? get the guy a sap for a birthday present. You lost your character. Tough luck i'm afraid. the rogue messed up. He probably laughed. I would too. Just create a plan for next time. nothing to stop playing over. just my view.
Splendide 03-22-07, 07:35 PM	My thoughts * Fair call from the rogue with more than one party member dominated. * Crit chart is silly. * Being Dominated sucks. * If you don't like the actual rogue player, then yeah, find another group.
Aeromus 03-22-07, 11:55 PM	I see no problem. High enough to fight a vampire; high enough for a raise dead spell. How would the rogue know you were dominated?
Splendide 03-22-07, 11:58 PM	Even more to the point, how would the rogue know he wouldn't shortly need to fight a vampire AND the rest of his party? You've got to start dropping people if you can when that happens.
TheDarkLord 03-23-07, 12:12 AM	The rogue acted more than reasonably. You're the one who's getting bent out of shape. I agree 100%. I see myself as a Good character (Neutral Good that is), though not exalted (Stupid). If my best friend joined with a couple of bad guys and brought against me what I thought was lethal force, I in turn would use lethal force to defend myself. If that means taking down my best friend, so be it. I don't see how you could argue that this in itself is a reason to shift his alignment whatsoever. Any one of you would do the same (If not, you are a cowardly person by nature :D).
TheBigShow 03-23-07, 08:21 AM	i guess it was just somebody playin in a way i would not. like i've said before, i could care less about the character. it sucked.
unusualsuspect 03-23-07, 12:06 PM	i guess it was just somebody playin in a way i would not. like i've said before, i could care less about the character. it sucked. At that point, it almost sounds like you're mad at the rogue for ridding you of playing a sucky character... :confused:
Praedoran 03-23-07, 02:20 PM	It was an accidental death caused by extreme circumstance. Don't be mad at him, hate the DM. He (the Rogue) might have meant to hurt you and simply put you into the negatives, easiest way for a -Rogue- to put you down. Was he supposed to pull punches against the toughest character in the group? Seriously, if the DM did nothing to stop the death of your character from something like that, then drop the campaign. He isn't running the game with -your- enjoyment in mind. Instead, he had the "Me vs. Players" mentality at the time. He will slip into it again and you will lose more characters.
trapspringer 03-23-07, 02:25 PM	Remember that this isn't like real life where murder is a capital offense. Murder in D&D is actually just a really sadistic kind of theft. It costs the dead person or the state a lot of cash to rectify the situation (which can be rectified with relatively little effort via a reincarnation spell). Under these circumstances the rogue's actions are really quite reasonable. "Oh ****, this is gettin' bad fast. I'm layin' the beat down on this guy, but I don't have time to deal with that *******. He's just gunna' have to take the negative level and be happy I saved him from eternal damnation as a spawn of this vampire. *SLICE*" Just sayin.
Saytr 03-23-07, 04:11 PM	Bunch of 4th levels against an ACTUAL Vampire? Sounds like your DM was trying some stupid, hackneyed plot device and got bit in the ass by his silly, houseruled crit table. The other guys (Cleric, Wiz and Pally) killed him? How did they get past his DR and fast healing? What did they do when he scrambled up the nearest wall, take him out with their awesome 2nd level spells? Did this "Vampire" use his gaseous form ability or did he just stand in the middle of the room screaming "Kill me! Kill me!" Sounds like a case of bad DMing to me. Maybe you need a better one.
Aeromus 03-23-07, 09:10 PM	Bunch of 4th levels against an ACTUAL Vampire? Sounds like your DM was trying some stupid, hackneyed plot device and got bit in the ass by his silly, houseruled crit table. The other guys (Cleric, Wiz and Pally) killed him? How did they get past his DR and fast healing? What did they do when he scrambled up the nearest wall, take him out with their awesome 2nd level spells? Did this "Vampire" use his gaseous form ability or did he just stand in the middle of the room screaming "Kill me! Kill me!" Sounds like a case of bad DMing to me. Maybe you need a better one. Yeah they do.
Zandolit 03-24-07, 02:50 AM	Remember that a character may not be able to distinguish between subdual and lethal damage. You as the player know because you've discussed it with the other players, but really, sometimes a character can't know that without some serious metagaming. In character, I think it's extremely unrealistic for the Rogue to see the Fighter (who he's probably seen take down a lot of people) coming at him and think, "Oh, he only seems to be trying to knock me out, no worries then." An attack is most of the time just going to look like an attack. Don't forget to look at it through the character's eyes. Bottom line: the best thing for the Rogue to do is probably to preserve his own life. Not out of selfishness, but because if he gets killed, he can't save any of the others. Better to risk the off chance of killing the Fighter and have to bring him back later than for the Rogue to go down too and most likely lose the Fighter and everyone else along with them. Even if the Fighter just knocked the Rogue unconscious, still not a good scene given the whole... you know... vampire situation. I'm with the Rogue on this one. I hope the Rogue (in character) is not pleased with how things went, but I don't see a need for him to be riddled with guilt, either. The Rogue took what I think was an appropriate action-- a calculated risk that seemed like the best way to save the party. It went wrong because of a freak accident, but that doesn't mean it was a horrible idea... just that plans don't always work as you hope, and you have to deal. I suggest you just take some time to cool off, and let it go.
Ace_of_time 03-24-07, 10:41 PM	The thief should of had another will save before he attacked you because that not something he would normally do. Vamps can't make you do just anything they want. Their is a limit and when that is reached you get another will save to break free. (i think you even get a +2)
Magrus 03-25-07, 12:00 PM	i just don't see it. Seems like you "just don't see it" because you happen to not want to. If you are that upset, and don't think you want to play anymore, don't. Don't show up, ask for opinions, and then argue with 80% of the folks that think you are over reacting and should think things through in a sensible manner. Just up and leave the group. Personally, this is reminding me of an argument I got into with my little sister when she was 8 and our 5 year old brother knocked her down and took the ball she was holding. She was rightfully ****** at being knocked down, but the little guy was 5 and it was his ball which she took from him in the first place. There was no reasoning with her that she was over-reacting, so she demanded a new ball of her own. She got to learn how to do the dishes instead.
Perseus_Stoned 03-25-07, 12:39 PM	in character, i don't know how the rogue and the rest of the party will react. they stopped right there, pretty much. they might surprise me, if i make a stink about this. if i don't, i doubt they'll do anything. nice role-playing right there. there were a billion ways of surviving the situation. the rogue acted like an idiot. if u r rolling lethal damage, and u know the rules of the crit chart, then u need to take responsibility. in other words, he was trying to cut my head off. that's the way i see that. of course u can play your character how u want; it's your character afterall. allignment change should definitely b looked at, if he doesn't repent. the party should really look at this character with a different aura now, however. overall, it is a sloppy group of players. they don't role-play very well, and there are some that cannot do simple math and basically make up attack rolls and such. i am very ****, and a stickler, which obviously is a problem. this is the best i got though. Nothing wrong with what the rogue did, its the DM at fault. 1) Dominate is one of the absolute worst spells any DM can ever use. There is *never* any reason why the game should be taken out of a player's hands and put into the DM's. Its a neat spell idea, but it just takes fun away and never adds to it if being used against the players. 2) As pointed out earlier a vampire was an incredibly bad encounter for such a low level party. However there were certainly not a billion ways of surviving the situation, as you said earlier. The rogue is not a main-line fighter and he was rapidly have to prepare to getting attacked by not only the vampires, but his party as well. He was not exalted and he had no reason to try to subdue you, when it put his own life at greater risk. He's no paladin and you shouldn't expect him to play as such. To see otherwise is juvenile, much as many of your bitter comments have rung as. If it bothers you that much you should talk it out with your DMing group, but I suspect situations like these are always going to be rolling around for you.
Treymordin 03-28-07, 07:48 AM	Protection from evil and circle of protection from evil are such great spells to have.
Jagyr Ebonwood 03-29-07, 10:56 PM	Slight derail: Why's everyone down on Dominate? It doesn't take the game away from a player, it just lets the DM tell the player what his character's new motive is. The player still gets to roleplay, roll dice, make decisions, etc. He just has to do all those things while keeping in mind what his character is being forced to think. A DM that takes total control of a dominated PC is a bad DM. All you need is a quick, private, 30 second conversation between the dommed player and the DM, and the player should be mature enough to roleplay his PC correctly. Back on topic: I agree that the crit chart has to go. But ignoring that for a second, I agree that the rogue should be held mostly responsible. If you know that there is a messed up crit chart that gives you a % chance to insta-kill on *every* attack, then you have to assume that with every attack, you're striking to kill. If my friend accidentally take some crazy drugs and came after me (a reasonable dominate analogy), I wouldn't swing a sword at his head, or pull a carving knife on him. Especially if he's trying to wrestle me to the ground (remember that he was *grappling* the rogue). I'd fight back, certainly, push him away, maybe even clock him one. If I couldn't stand up to him physically, I'd try to wriggle away and get far away from him (what's the rogue's Escape Artist mod?). Unless you're playing an evil character, attacking your ally for lethal damage should be your *last* option. PS. "Well, Ambrose is definitely unconscious. That's 19 points of damage." "19 points...I'm dead!" "Oops." "Who has healing magic?" "He did..."
Perseus_Stoned 03-29-07, 11:08 PM	It doesn't take the game away from a player, it just lets the DM tell the player what his character's new motive is. I think most people against dominate (this would include me) would say this statement is an oxymoron. The player's character is the one thing the DM shouldn't ever get to influence in his actions.
Cartigan 03-30-07, 08:05 AM	the rogue is supposed to b good alligned, too. wouldn't the "good" thing to do b try and subdue back, or mayb go full defensive. Unless it's lawful good, hello, decapitation. Though I would've opted for pulling out a sap - of course that is really only an option with quickdraw, though he probably couldn't have done anything. Hmm, get grappled and messed up too or defend myself. The chances of me not messing up some one else in that situation are near none. Unless you're playing an evil character, attacking your ally for lethal damage should be your *last* option. Damage voids grapple last I checked. Rolling really good here is like rolling one against the vampire - either way, the gods of dice rolling hate you and it isn't your fault, especially with some bs house crit table.
trapspringer 03-30-07, 01:08 PM	Slight derail: Why's everyone down on Dominate? It doesn't take the game away from a player, it just lets the DM tell the player what his character's new motive is. While I understand what you are getting at, this method is still really frustrating for the player in question. There are lots of other challenges and tricks to be used on Players that don't require them to act in a manner contrary to the way they envision their character. Fear is another similar effect I try to avoid. It just isn't cool for the heroes to get sucker-punched like that. Dominate and Fear effects are great for using on friendly NPCs, though. You get basically the same bang for your buck, plus you make the players look bad ass because they stood up to what the people around them couldn't. They're the heroes, let them be heroic. Then kill them with the cleric they hired to play band-aid bot.