Post/Author/DateTime	Post
adria 02-22-05, 02:14 PM	Characters with different alignments CAN get along in games, right? Our bi-weekly game is constantly riddled with in-party arguments. It is getting so bad, that some of the players are finding a lesser enjoyment playing the game. However, there is always that choice between playing your character so deeply that it lessens everyone else’s enjoyment, and not playing your character the way you would normally so that the game can be enjoyable for everyone. Our biggest inparty fighting comes from religion and morals. What is morally objectionable for one character is not so for another. Have you dealt with this? If so, what is the best way to get around it without destroying the game, and with everyone still having a great time?
Board_Rider 02-22-05, 02:22 PM	What alignment are they? A well played evil party or mixture of good/evil parties will argue and bicker. If RPed properly just based off of alignment. However if the arguments are OOC stuff than you, as the DM, gotta nix that. If the arguments are over another PC actions...take a break and look at the situation. Is this action normally taken by the PC or the Player just goofing around. Sadly, it's kind of like a double edge sword. You want players that Roleplay a myriad of characters while keeping things cushy for one another. Unfortunately some players don't play that way and play their characters as they see fit. The best thing I can offer is to tell your players to quit worrying about another characters ethics....at least so seriously.
Thoronmir 02-22-05, 02:41 PM	Characters of conflicting alignments are going to rub each other the wrong way sooner or later. The key to keeping the game playable is for the players to realize that perpetual conflict only leads to escalation and, eventually, outright animosity. Problems that begin as in-game rifts quickly become OOC issues. Players need to find points of flexibility in their PCs’ perspectives. Assuming the PCs (and I mean the characters, not just the players) all desire to work together toward a common goal, they need to pick and choose their “battles” carefully. If the PCs aren’t designed to remain flexible, then your campaign is not salvageable. Unfortunately, too many players are selfish when it comes to these issues. They’ve each created their PCs in a specific image and they insist on playing them as they see fit, without regard for how the other PCs might react. They dump the burden of party cohesiveness onto the DM, who grows frustrated with feeling like he’s running a daycare center instead of a campaign. Eventually, the DM comes here for advice. Tension between PCs is not necessarily bad … some of the best campaigns I’ve ever run or played in involved some degree of distrust or conflict among the PCs. But, in each case, the PCs were designed to be able to look past their differences and cooperate when it mattered. Also, in practically every such case, the PCs were not intended to remain static in their opinions (e.g., the Evil PCs were to become “redeemed” to Good over the course of the campaign). The best advice I can offer is to throw the burden of party unity back where it belongs … onto the players. If they can’t find a way to work together while preserving the sound roleplaying aspects of their characters, the situation is beyond your control. All you can do is remind the players that the game is intended to be a cooperative exercise that is fun for all.
cambric 02-22-05, 02:55 PM	Characters with different alignments CAN get along in games, right? YES!! We have a party of 6 PC's, though all "good", there are varying from "really" lawful to "really" chaotic. We're mature about it, (we're all in our late 20's to late 30's and a couple of us have played D&D for over 20 years) though our PC's do get into "arguments", we have learned to relax about it outside the game. In years past, that wasn't always the case...and I guess that we've matured enough to realize our friendship is more important than a game. We will have dinner or do something the night before we play, to discuss what we want to do and to just hang out...even if we have "in game" arguments, by the time we all agree to stop playing for the session, we "let it go", no need to take it OOC...but I've played with some people that can NOT do that. Cam
Chedders 02-22-05, 03:30 PM	you can always get along with different alignments and different dieties... right now, i'm running a campaign with: a cleric of Kelemvor(LN), a cleric of Silverbeard(LN), a (wannabe paladin) follower of Lathander(LG), a follower of Talos (CN), a ranger of Mielikki (NG), and a "has yet to be decided" rogue (CN) of course their deities have different ideas (especially seeing that Lathander hates Talos) but it takes good role playing to get through the conflicts, and good DMing to make it fun for everyone. for example, the Talos follower is all about vengeance, but doesn't just slaughter anyone in front of the others (well, anymore...) but as DM, i usually give him the opportunity to follow through on his vengeance, unbeknownst to the rest of the group. (usually by sneaking away at night to wreak havoc) nothing too time comsuming, but if he wants to go steal something, or make sure someone is "defeated", i let him... sometimes, there are plot twists that he needs the entire group to help him with, but they wouldn't normal do... so he gets creative... he bends the truth because he knows he can manipulate them into doing something their faith normally wouldn't... i.e. raid a outpost to steal some loot, but tell the rest of the group that they are holding so-and-so hostage, or they stole something from so-and-so, and you have to retrieve it... blah blah blah... so basically, my suggestion is that the players need to know their own faith, but also know the other members faith's, too... from experience, Lawful and Good aligned players aren't so easy to bend in their faith, but the Chaotic and Evil aligned ones should know that, and need to find ways to "trick" the others into doing what they suggest... even if it means showing mercy in front of them... ;) nothing says "sucker" like a LG paladin teamed up with a CN rogue... ;)
adria 02-22-05, 03:30 PM	for the record, I'm one of the players.... :) We're having a difficult time with this right now and I would hate to see a). people leave the game or b). the game end due to the fact that we can't get along... the other problem I think we are encountering, is the inability of some of the players to remove player knowledge from character knowledge. Let’s say “Bob” knows something but his character does not. He will find a way to weasel himself inside the situation so that his character knows about it, and hence, more fighting. Yes, we ARE all over the age of 10 but you would never know :rolleyes:
Super Guy 02-22-05, 03:38 PM	Sounds like a nice setup you got there, cambric :tiphat: Anyways, yes, characters of weird alignments can get along. It's hardest with good and evil, though. Or LE and CE, those are awful combos, too. Here's rules of thumb: Good and neutral parties can go easily together, since neutral peope often prefer to be surrounded by someone who they can trust. Good and neutral parties with a paladin might have a slight problem, but as long as the neutral people don't cause a fuss for the paladin to complain about, no problem. Neutral and evil parties of course work, though it's better if there are no oppositely aligned Chaotic or Lawful members. LN and CE is a no go, as is CN and LE. They're almost always bound to get at one another, worse than good vs. evil would. All evil parties work, so long as their is no conflicting Chaos/Law. Again, you're more likely to have NE and NG than LE and CE. Good and evil parties CAN work, it depends. If the evil ones in question are slaughterers and are not forced to work with the good ones (i.e. they don't need eachother to save the world) then it won't work, unless the good ones never know that the evils slaughter people. If the evil ones aren't murderers, then it's more likely to work. Especially if they are friends. If you found out that your best friend was evil, would you say "So long" or would you say "Well... you are my best friend, and this hasn't stopped us before" ? If there is a paladin in the party, it won't work unless either the paladin doesn't know about the evil members, or they are forced to work together.
adria 02-22-05, 03:43 PM	Our party is pretty much split this way: CN Fighter NG Rogue LG Priest LG Mage NG Druid
Chedders 02-22-05, 03:44 PM	for the problem with separating "what the player knows from what the character knows", that's something the DM needs to lay the law down for... if a player says "I'm going to ask about XXX" when the character would have no reason to do so or no knowledge about XXX, the the DM needs to determine why... if the player can't come up with a reason for it, then the character didn't do it... simple as that... example: I had a player fighting something with DR/magic and no magic weapons. on his turn, he said he wasn't doing anything, because he couldn't hurt the creature and wanted to conserve arrows... I asked him how his character knew he couldn't hurt the creature... with no good answer, i told him he couldn't just "not do anything"... players need to know where to draw the line between player/character knowledge, and if they can't, the DM has to enforce... is there a specific problem that is going on that you could share with us? it's a lot easier to say what so-and-so should do in a certain situation than to give broad generalities...
Super Guy 02-22-05, 03:51 PM	Our party is pretty much split this way: CN Fighter NG Rogue LG Priest LG Mage NG Druid I don't really see the problem. I hope the NG and LG aren't bickering? That'd just mean the LGs are ridiculously tight about the law, and they should loosen up or make new characters, because if they're not going to accept anyone that's not lawful, well, they're outnumbered. I see the most likely problem with CN and LG. Still, it's not hard to keep them in line. I have a friend that I consider LG, and my closer friends who play DnD say that I'm Neutral, with slightly Chaotic tendencies. Yet, my LG friend and I still get along. How is the CN player playing? Not Chaotic Moron, I hope? Does he do random and stupid things, blow the party's money, not help out when he should? If so, I can see where the conflict comes in- he's playing against the party. Talk to him about it.
adria 02-22-05, 03:55 PM	Yes, and please keep in mind that there is always more to the story, but here’s the general issue…. We were in a mountain to kill a creature, and encountered a shapeshifting dragon. At the time we encountered the dragon, she was in the form of an elf and we didn’t know that she was anything otherwise. Her and her two group members needed help getting out of the mountain. In exchange for them helping us to find the creature, we were to help them escape from the mountain. For insurance, they had asked for a holy symbol of one of the good gods to hang onto from one of the treasure hoards in the mountain. We agreed to this. Shortly thereafter, we found out the elf was a dragon. The fighter brought up the idea of killing the dragon. The LG characters agreed that we “made a deal” and didn’t want to break the deal, so in their opinion, we were bound to help the dragon escape. The rogue decided that he would give the dragon a “fake” holy symbol, of which we also found in the treasure hoard, and the LG characters are vehemently opposed to it. This is causing some of the party conflict. They are holding to their alignment so much that they will not break a deal, and some of the other players just want to kill it. No agreements there. One of the players heard the “rogue” telling someone that he was going to give the fake holy symbol, and although the character wasn’t within earshot, he suddently had to walk over to “see what was going on”. While I can understand this happening, this is a common occurrence with this player. How to handle? Is this a dm issue or can I, as a character, bring it up in-game?
adria 02-22-05, 03:58 PM	How is the CN player playing? Not Chaotic Moron, I hope? Does he do random and stupid things, blow the party's money, not help out when he should? If so, I can see where the conflict comes in- he's playing against the party. Talk to him about it. well, since I'm the CN player :D I think things are okay LOL Usually I'm pretty much in agreement with the NG rogue, although I find that the NG Druid usually sides on the side of LG. I find that myself and the NG players usually bend things to fit the LG alignment, but that's coming from my perspective too, so take it for what it's worth...
Chedders 02-22-05, 04:14 PM	hm... interesting... as the CN rogue, it's your job to get around such things as "morals" and such... ;) ok, your party made a deal with the dragon... was the deal to not kill it or to help it out of the dungeon? (if so, kill it once you get outside...) is it an evil dragon? do you have slight of hand? my first gut instinct on what to do: first, try to slight of hand the real holy symbol and replace it with the fake one... bam... no one but you knows that the holy symbol is fake... second, if the dragon is evil, play on the "good nature" of your companions, telling the story of the countless innocent victims that were *probably* slaughtered by the dragon (bluff skill rocks), or that the dragon will most likely turn on the party when you are no longer needed. third, what about the deal you made to kill the beast? will they break their word in one instance to not break it in another? where do they draw the line on lying? fourth, you could always incite the dragon into attacking first.. maybe a rude comment under your breath to make the dragon angry? if he attacks first, then it's self defence, right? as for the overhearing thing... that's more likely something to handle out of game... but maybe suggest to the DM to make the character roll a listen check, using the modifiers, to see if the character actually was able to hear the conversation... or use good ol' bluff to convince the player you were talking about something else... if all else fails, let the dragon live... knowing in your head you can always come back to kill it later... maybe after you frame it for something, blame it for something, or can convince your party that they made a mistake letting it live...
adria 02-22-05, 04:18 PM	first, i'm the fighter :) I'd LOVE to kill it ;) The agreement, exactly, was to help it "leave" the mountain...
Chedders 02-22-05, 04:33 PM	sorry, i need to learn how to read sometimes... as a fighter, you're limited to what skills you have access to... hmm. if it's an evil dragon, the good guys shouldn't be working with it anyways. you have any idea what type of dragon it is? what is the holy symbol of? (good or evil deity?) you could succumb to your chaotic nature and sunder the holy symbol, but i'm sure that would cause more problems in the group... you could fulfill your word, and lead the dragon out of the mountain, then attack it there (but i'm sure if the DM doesn't want you to fight it, the dragon will just leave) you could play on the fact that it was polymorphed as a way to show that it can't be trusted. and, technically, if the dragon is dead, you would have helped it "leave" the mountain, and pass on to dragon heaven... ;) but probably the best thing to do is to bite the bullet and let the good guys win this fight... but don't forget about it... make sure you're always thinking of ways to get around their oaths and pledges... and how you can manipulate them in the future...