Post/Author/DateTime	Post
FriendoftheDork 05-02-06, 01:07 AM	(Long post, please bear with me) OK first of all I have to say that this new campaign is very atypical since only 5 races are allowed to the players: Orcs, half orcs, goblins, kobolds and hobgoblins. Despite this it is NOT an evil campaign, and the party is part of a mercenary company of the same races working for a mostly human settlement in frontier FR lands (western heartlands). The DM did however allow the evil alignment, although most of the mercenaries are neutral, there are as many evil as good members, or more. The goal of the campaign is not to play monsters, but to have the party survive and cooperate with a world mostly hostile to them. I'm not sure what the other party members alignments are, although my guess is LN for both, with one heavily leaning towards good. I didn't know that before I decided my character's alignment. My goblin druid named Glubiyet (level 3 now) is neutral evil. He is not a psycotic mass-murderer (although he favors a CE nature deity over the good ones), and he can cooperate well enough with the mercenary band and the party. He is selfish, but he has already cured party members even without them asking for it. He is asocial though, with charisma 6, and he prefers the company of his wolf companion rather than the mercenaries, but he understands the value of being part of an organization, at least the protection of numbers in an otherwise hostile world. Being a wuss has made Glub a target for brutality and made him paranoid and vengeful. He loves being a druid mainly for the power it gives him, as people usually fear his wolf and his power over nature and elements. He wants to aid and protect the members of his merc company, as long as they don't gp against him, but values himself far above anyone else. Humans and others not under his protection means nothing to him other than the gain it can give him, but he won't kill them just "because." He is a mostly self-learned druid, but has learned some from the local Malar druids, who are also part of an evil lycanthrope organization. He appriciates their knowledge and training but has no real loyalty to them. Still, being part of the world spanning druid organization he doesen't count them enemies and respects them a great deal. Ok enough about personality and motivation. The party members are one LN or N kobold sorcerer and one LN or LG hobgoblin fighter, which is also the party leader. They and I are an elite task force often acting on our own with alot of autonomy. The first adventure was about finding a missing envoy to a friendly tribe of kobold miners. We fought pretty well along the way, and even though Glub stayed out of melee (6 str remember) he aided with spells and healed the leader when needed. We found the tribe turned to zombies, and encountered the one responsible, a cleric of the god of undeath. We managed to destroy the abominations (druids hates undead) but the BBEG got away. All in all we worked pretty well together, alignent being no problem. The second adventure the DM decided to throw in a twist.. we investigated an outlying farm gone silent, and found them slaughtered, with the sign of Malar (CE god of slaughter) on the wall. The others didn't recognize the sign but I did because of my contact with the Malar druids and having him as patron diety. The party and the merc company doesen't know this, and those druids are pretty much outlaws kill on sight, so I want to keep that secret. Yet I did reveal what the mark meant. Later we found the possible perpetrators - a group I identified as Malar worshippers, that later turned into werewolves. I told the party as much, and the hobgoblin wanted to kill them for killing the members of the human farmstead. I didn't care a bit for the humans, they were too far off to matter for the company, and the slaughter didn't disrupt trade and profit for the company to any degree so I figured it didn't matter. Also, I fear and respect these creatures and didn't want them killed unless they attacked me or my merc company. So I (truthfully) told the party that attacking the werewolves would mean suicide, and advised going back to report as well. We did, and the leaders of the company didn't want to mess with the werewolves without a better reason either. However some time later we were sent to purchase silver from a dwarven community so that the merc company could possibly fight lycans better. We were given 1500 gp, packhorses and sent off to negotiate a deal. Along the way we were confronted by human bandits at night. After a long failed negotation they attacked us. I got to cover in the forest while my fellows were shot half to death by crossbows. My wolf had gone hunting, and I wanted cover from fire and charging both, as well as taking advantage of woodland stride for the first time. Since the opposition were 6 1st level rogues the battle turned in our favor, and I used my flaming sphere spell to great effect while the sorc used color spray and the hobgoblin chopped with his longsword. In the end the hobgoblin dropped as there were only 2 enemies left. Since I couldn't reach him in 30' I decided to move my sphere to burn a bandit to death and move towards the hobgoblin to heal him. I figured I could move and heal next round anyway instead of using all the round for movement and the first action next round for healing. The players thought this smacked of disregard for the PC's life but I disagree. The sorcerer used a potion of cure light wounds on the hobgoblin before I got there though, as he didn't know how long the hobgoblin would survive. The last bandit decided to flee. In my vengeance I decided to pursue, thinking my 30' speed combined with woodland stride would catch up very fast. The DM pretty much nerfed this, but I was able to take the bandit down with a produce flame attack. After killing him and taking his ear back as proof to my fellow party member's disgust, I found that 2 surviving bandits were our prisoners. I wanted to kill them for daring to rob and kill us, but the others wanted to let them go and I didn't push it. I did take another ear though, but stopped it when the sorcerer asked me to. My vengeance has limits after all, and the bloodlust was satisfied. This incident has left my party members a bit more wary of me, understandably, but I won't turn against them. The last part of the adventure was a bit more troublesome. The dwarves were even more paranoid than my character, yet the hobgoblin put away his sword and shield before meeting them and his charisma prevented them from attacking us right on sight. I remained on my wolf with my shield up and my club in my belt. After all, without my companion I feel weak and without my shield and armor, vulnerable. A Dwarven cleric used Discern Lies (under heavy guard by 20 dwarves) to ask us about our intentions, and learned that we wanted silver to fight werewolves and defend ourself and the human settlement. Then he used detect chaos (none of us registered) and an unidentified spell (probably detect evil as he frowned alot at me), they allowed our charismatic leader to negotiatiate the deal while we stayed behind. I rode back a bit in order to wait. Some dwarf, realized that I still had a shield pointed his crossbow at me and ordered me to drop it, as well as all my weapons. Having issues about being aimed at with a loaded heavy crossbow, and serious trust issues as well, my character reflexively raised his shield, took total defense and wailed "don't shoot". The dwarves, paranoid as they are took this for some agressive action and at 5 crossbow bolts hit my shield, one going through and wounding me somewhat. I turn my tailed and ran, 200' away in one round, and since the dwarves needed to reload a whole round I got away. The alarm went off, and my party members were forced down, stripped for weapons and armor and arrested. After 2 days of intensive questioning (not torture), dispelling and magical probing, the hobgoblin still managed to get a good deal (market price silver only!) and they were allowed to leave with their stuff. At this point they were a bit annoyed at me for doing something so stupid, but they didn't punish me as they don't think I did it on purpose to spoil the deal (as I didn't). Well, that's it for now. Thanks for reading all this. Now, do you think this character will work in the current party? Or is this a recipe for disaster and I'll have to change very soon? My character is ready to fight werevolves if he has to, but he is evil and unless he's treated very well and guided towards the path of good he will remain so. He's uncouth, agressive, paranoid, disgusting and uncaring, but his skills, spells and abilities are very useful if not vital to the party. He can scout very well, heal, contribute with spells in combat, and his wolf is very nice backup combatant with it's trip ability. He doesen't hesitate to pull his weight or aid his comrades, although he is careful and tries to stay out of melee most of the time and let others take the heat. And most importantly, he will not betray the party unless they betray him (as I've assured all OOC). Well, is it going to work? Do I have to do something to make it work?
Silverstream 05-02-06, 02:11 AM	Looking at the actions you and your party have taken, it seems to work out well. In game, your character has roleplayed well with the others and there have been no hardships. Your involvement with the other two in your party is not that unusual, and your alignment is not far enough off that it's a problem--at least until the hobgoblin turns good, in which case you'll probably be persuaded to turn to true neutral out of habit. From your actions, you have chosen the proper alignment, it seems. And considering the alignment differences in your party, that sems to me to be a great opportunity for roleplaying. The only thing that might prove unsettling is if the other Players (not characters) don't want you to play an evil party member. If the other PC's are willing to allow you to play an evil character without them being (out of game) oppresive to your chosen alignment, great! In game oppressive is, of course, to be expected on occasion, as the others seem to be true mercenaries and have a few scruples. Sounds fun. Makes me wish my own group (in game) didn't agree on most every issue. Conflict makes for much enjoyment.
Another Gnome 05-02-06, 02:18 AM	Aside from circumstantial evidence of your DM being just a little trigger-happy with your character because poor Glubie is evil, I really don't see a problem.
Cantankerous 05-02-06, 03:49 AM	Well, if the characters are annoyed, no problem. I would hope that the Players weren't. There was nothing in YOUR account of what happened that seemed in the least out of character or improper. Such actions would be welcome in our group, although there to, the characters of the other Players might get annoyed as well, I'm sure that the Players themselves would not. Isshia
FriendoftheDork 05-02-06, 11:52 AM	Looking at the actions you and your party have taken, it seems to work out well. In game, your character has roleplayed well with the others and there have been no hardships. Your involvement with the other two in your party is not that unusual, and your alignment is not far enough off that it's a problem--at least until the hobgoblin turns good, in which case you'll probably be persuaded to turn to true neutral out of habit. From your actions, you have chosen the proper alignment, it seems. And considering the alignment differences in your party, that sems to me to be a great opportunity for roleplaying. The only thing that might prove unsettling is if the other Players (not characters) don't want you to play an evil party member. If the other PC's are willing to allow you to play an evil character without them being (out of game) oppresive to your chosen alignment, great! In game oppressive is, of course, to be expected on occasion, as the others seem to be true mercenaries and have a few scruples. Sounds fun. Makes me wish my own group (in game) didn't agree on most every issue. Conflict makes for much enjoyment. Thanks for the praise, I try my best not to play a disruptive stupid evil PC. The players has not told me straight that they don't want me playing evil, although I know for a fact that one player is generally uncomfortable with evil, but he has played one himself so I don't think it will matter. When you said "has a few scruples" I think you mean "has few scrouples." Well the hobgoblin certianly seemed to have scruples, and the sorc wanted mercy for prisoners. But so far we are only 4 players (1, a kobold rogue had to leave early, don't know his alignment), but a 5th will join. Aside from circumstantial evidence of your DM being just a little trigger-happy with your character because poor Glubie is evil, I really don't see a problem. Don't worry, the DM is trigger happy no matter my alignment. ;) At the encounter in the woods the bandits had crossbows in hands (angled down) while we negotiated. When I first wanted to burst into cover, the DM told me all six would be able to shoot me before I would reach the cover, no initative rolled. I decided to hide behind the fighter instead, and after the bandits fired at my companion did I get into cover. Isshia I think the players (including the DM) got a little annoyed when I refused the dwarfs' order to "bend over", but it worked out after all and didn't really matter.
FriendoftheDork 05-03-06, 05:15 PM	OK here's an update: It seems this could be a problem after all, at least that I heard of from one of the players. He claims that both his character and and the other one hates my characters guts. OK I expected as much, but I thought mature PLAYERS would not be affected by this. However, he also claims that my character does not cooperate well, as he usually rides out of melee at the start of combat and either uses fire spells from afar and/or summons allies, then only closes when the enemy is badly hurt to finish him off with my wolf. To me this is the natural tactics of a very weak goblin, stay out of trouble, aid with spells, finish off with companion. This has resulted in him hardly being damaged at all these combats, while the more melee oriented fighter and later ranger has been hurt quite a bit. During a recon mission to the same kobold dungeons we first cleared of zombies, to check up on the dwarves out company has sold the mines to, disaster struck. As we snuck in, the kobold sorcerer was first heard, then spotted. My character was still hiding but stayed behind. Instead of running, as was out initial plan, the kobold surrendered. The dwarven sentries got him down, and even struck him (flat-sided) to make him spread his legs etc. I thought this was stupid of him, but since he was an allly I thought I should help out. After one guard left to fetch more, I cast faire-fire on the remaining to distract him enough that the kobold could get away. He remained there, and the dwarf called the alarm. Since I heard more coming, I ran past the guard, taking an AoO in the process. The kobold still didn't move until the dwarf actually tried to kill him, and by then it was too late. I got away, but he was captured by the other dwarven guards coming at them en masse. Since I still think we shouldn't kill our friends, I didn't attack these dwarves but rather fled to warn the hobgoblin and escape. The hobgoblin wanted to such thing (damn honor) and fought the dwarves and died after killing two of them. I got away and reported to the leaders that they were dead. Altthough both were taken alive, they were executed by the dwarves. The other players thought it was wrong to leave them behind instead of fighting the dwarves, but I think I gave them enough chances to flee, perhaps to regroup, but at least the one players probably wanted me to fight and perhaps die with him. Now, I think it would be very out of character to sacrifice my life for my companions, and I see not need to risk melee when I can be just as effective, no more effective casting spells from a distance. Sure, that's one less meatshield, but I can summon animals to do that instead. I know you only have my words to base yourself on, and the claims on the other player, but do you think my character has not cooperated?
Lincoln Hills 05-03-06, 07:23 PM	What's that aphorism that I keep seeing Monte Cook use? Runs something like "If you use the excuse 'I'm playing my character,' and the rest of the players are not enjoying the game because of your character, then the problem is you - not them." Just - Switch your character from NE to straight N with some chaotic tendencies, assure your fellow players that Glub will back up their decisions a bit more reliably from now on, and play on. Nothing says he has to have a change of heart like that, but neither is there a rule that he -can't-. Trust me, you'll game more enjoyably and longer by making the switch.
WolfHati 05-04-06, 03:40 AM	You should probably not try to play a 6 charisma character like a 6 charisma character, because if the other players don't like the character, it's not going to be a fun game at all. If you are to be boorish, be endearingly so, inappropriate, but not mean, jokes to the NPCs and the like. As far as actual combat goes, you seem to be doing exactly what you should be. I somehow suspect that a druid is going to be doing a ton more with spells than he ever will with any melee or even ranged weapon with 6 strength. As well done as I think your character is, though, it does not seem to fit very well with the given DM or players. Try talking to them about their character ideas and try and share some of yours. I get the sneaking suspicion that the other players probably aren't as focused on the role-playing aspect of the game. Although things do seem to have gotten off to a rocky start, maybe, if talked to, they might be more open to a greater degree of character development.
FriendoftheDork 05-04-06, 12:34 PM	Ok guys, I talked to the second player, and it seems that he's wasn't so concerned about my character. He did think my character seemed a bit cowardly in the fight vs an Ogre (I'll come back to this later), but nothing game-breaking and he didn't think my character couldn't cooperate at all, or that I should have to change my character. So it seems it's only the single player that has a problem with him, and as I've already said I know he has problems with evil character in generals. Oh, when I asked him as much he said he didn't have a problem with evil PCs unless they were selfish, cowardly and unwilling to seriously risk their lives for their teammates. To me that is an evil character in a nutshell - one who values his own life over that of any allies but he failed to understand me, or disagreed. As for a DM he has not said he hates my character or that he can't cooperate, he's only asked me wether I wished to favor the Malar werewolves over the mercenary company, and he was pleased to hear I would not. Other that that he has only asked me to tone down the wolf as he dislikes animal companions and cohorts that takes up too much time from the PCs. So I believe that the real problem is the one disgruntled player, and the fact that he feels he needs a scapegoat for losing his character, and later because he takes alot of damage during fights while mine usually walks out unscathed. So even if I actually do alot of damage to the enemy, heals the party, helps them scout and summons in creatures I think he's more blind to this compared to a brave fighter standing and taking damage. Well that's a theory at least, don't know that for sure. Ok now I forgot to mention the development of the campaign after my first two companions stupidly got themselves killed. The next two PCs are one human ranger and one orc rogue. The orc is part of the same merc company, the human is not. Strangely enough the human ranger seem to have memories of the late hobgoblin fighter's life, and the orc has memories of the kobold sorcerer (coincidentally the same players play them). Anyway as I was sent away with 2 orcs (one the rogue) to scout in a huge swamp for at least 2 months (basically being sent to Alaska for an agent) we met the human ranger and now he tags along because of his memories, and he has showed the desire to aid in combat. One of the orcs died in the first encounter (lvl 1 barbarian, played by a new player as a 1-night stand), but it was not a fault of my character or anyone else, just poor luck and low power (we encountered enemy 6 orcs w/1 lvl 1 barb leader). The next time we encounter an ogre while camping. The rogue and ranger tries to hide, while my character mounts his wolf and rides backwards 50' to hide as well. The Ogre spots the closest hiding characters, and proceeds to attack the ranger, doing good damage with his club.. erh small tree. Initative is rolled, and I act first (at 24) by casting Flaming Sphere, which the ogre doges easily (reflex negates). The ogre smashes the ranger down to 1 hp, and the rogue attacks the troll.The ranger disengages (wisely). It's my turn and I start to summon a hippogriff. The ogre tries to throw an axe after the ranger, but misses. My turn, " Buckbeak" attacks the troll, missing horribly. I wonder if I can get into position to heal the ranger, but the Dm says I can't reach him on one move (50'). Thus I start to circle around while casting my signature spell, Produce Flame. The Ogre also misses so i doesen't matter. We all attack the ogre with missile attacks, and after a combo of hippogriff hits and missile attacks we kill it. I should probably have started summing a round before I did, but even still I don't think my actions were cowardly for such a character role. Now as for the other players not being roleplay-minded... I'm not so sure. Oh they might not be the greatest roleplayer, but it seems if anything I'm the most focused on making an effective character, as my druid is surely min-maxed. Still I feel they are to some degree roleplaying themselves in the form of a heroic class rather than roleplaying a completely different personality they roleplay aspects of their own. For instance, one of the players usually play either LG/LN or CG/CN. His lawful characters are lawful and honorable almost to an extreme (fighting to the death for a lost cause, driven by "righteous" fury when administering "justice"). For example a LG dwarf he played immedeately executed some elves that was raping an elf maiden, even throwing axes at the fleeing survivors. His chaotic characters are annoying, more focused on "carousing" than the adventure and steals from everyone, including skimming off the party wealth. They hate long discussions, planning and common sense and love senseless drinking, womanizing and silly behavior. I know of at least one campaign that had to be dropped because of this, and another DM that simply don't want to play with him anymore. He's been a player in my games alot though, and despite the problems I usually get by as I discourage the worst. Well, you're thoughts are, as always appriciated.
Cantankerous 05-06-06, 02:12 AM	Oh, when I asked him as much he said he didn't have a problem with evil PCs unless they were selfish, cowardly and unwilling to seriously risk their lives for their teammates. To me that is an evil character in a nutshell - one who values his own life over that of any allies but he failed to understand me, or disagreed. Ok, the underlined section first. I disagree ENTIRELY. Not with the fact that this is your take on it, but rather with the fact that it is necessarily a valid one. Even the most completely Chaotic Evil (arguably the most self centered version of evil) character CAN (Not necessarily will) value the life of his companions MORE than his own. Even if he does not, he can value their utility to him to such an extent that to an outside observer it seems like the same thing. Now, to the not underlined section. Using "I'm playing in character" as an excuse is NOT valid in this sense...the "injured party" of one of the "evil characters" cowardly actions, if he survives it, is every bit as justified in claiming the same thing if eh goes over to where your character is sleeping in the middle of the night and coup-de-graces him, even if his Alignment is not Evil of any variety. This, and the way that you've stated in your second post, that you are playing the character may not be out of character, but it is NO MORE conducive to the game than having your character coup-de-graced in his sleep would be. Isshia
danielinthewolvesden 05-06-06, 03:54 AM	What's that aphorism that I keep seeing Monte Cook use? Runs something like "If you use the excuse 'I'm playing my character,' and the rest of the players are not enjoying the game because of your character, then the problem is you - not them." Exactly. Really, mixed alignment parties rarely work, and it's clear that you are the only Evil and also the Outsider and somewhat disruptive. I'll point out that sometimes a player gets a bad rep for running such a PC, if that's the only kind the rest of the table has seen him run. Since this is a new group, I'd strongly suggest you bring in a new PC that is very team oriented, like a NG cleric or something.
Cantankerous 05-06-06, 04:41 AM	An evil character CAN very easily work in a group enviroment and still be fully and wholely evil; the ONLY thing that is needed is to remember that while protraying the character in character for their alignment is a goal, there are MANY ways to do so that will not in any way disrupt the team aspect of the group as a whole. It is that team aspect of the group that seems the stumbling block. If the other Players are expecting team oriented actions and you're playing it self centered (irregardless of whether the characters alignment is Lawful good or Chaotic Evil or any other flavor of alignment) there WILL be problems. Isshia
FriendoftheDork 05-06-06, 07:49 AM	Ok, the underlined section first. I disagree ENTIRELY. Not with the fact that this is your take on it, but rather with the fact that it is necessarily a valid one. Even the most completely Chaotic Evil (arguably the most self centered version of evil) character CAN (Not necessarily will) value the life of his companions MORE than his own. Even if he does not, he can value their utility to him to such an extent that to an outside observer it seems like the same thing. I didn't mean that evil characters CAN'T value the lives of othes more than hisself. But, altrusitic behavior in general is good. In fact, the alignment sections says that willingness to risk yourself to protect others is good. Do you really think that selfishness is good? And look at the situation at hand: The merc company are allies because there is strenght in numbers.. nothing more. ATM he is travelling with an orc he hardly knows and a human he certainly doesen't know. Just because he has some of the memories of a dead party member (a really stupid one too) doesen't mean my character trusts him, at least not yet. Now why on earth should my character sacrifice his life for these? Now, to the not underlined section. Using "I'm playing in character" as an excuse is NOT valid in this sense...the "injured party" of one of the "evil characters" cowardly actions, if he survives it, is every bit as justified in claiming the same thing if eh goes over to where your character is sleeping in the middle of the night and coup-de-graces him, even if his Alignment is not Evil of any variety. This, and the way that you've stated in your second post, that you are playing the character may not be out of character, but it is NO MORE conducive to the game than having your character coup-de-graced in his sleep would be. HUh? Now I don't understand. My character has never backstabbed the party or worked against them, even if he had alot of opportunities. Just because I'm playing a druid as if he were a pure spellcaster doesen't mean it justifies him being CDG'd of a party member. It is not my character's fault that the other party members failed to stick to the plan (to flee from the dwarves if deteced) to let themselves be captured and even killed in combat. If I thought I could help them I would-and I tried persuading them to flee with me. So the only blame I have is surviving. An evil character CAN very easily work in a group enviroment and still be fully and wholely evil; the ONLY thing that is needed is to remember that while protraying the character in character for their alignment is a goal, there are MANY ways to do so that will not in any way disrupt the team aspect of the group as a whole. It is that team aspect of the group that seems the stumbling block. If the other Players are expecting team oriented actions and you're playing it self centered (irregardless of whether the characters alignment is Lawful good or Chaotic Evil or any other flavor of alignment) there WILL be problems. Isshia My character certainly wants teamwork when fighting. He can summon creatures to help the rogue flank, he has some direct damage spells, and he don't mind using utility spells to aid himself and the party. If I really was putting roleplaying evil on a higher shelf than working with the party, I would have spied on them, helped the Malar werewolves, thwarted their attempt to purchase silver, and perhaps even killed the party off in their sleep. But I don't want to do that as I know it will break the campaign. Daniel: This is a new campaign, but not a new group, as I have played with and DMed for them all. We of eachother pretty well. I know that the player that complained has some serious issues, suffering from depression and can be very moody at times. Despite this, we've had fun times before and we could probably have it again. I'm going to play with the same people soon anyway, and there I play a LN cleric of St. Cuthbert that is very team and law oriented. So It's not like I play the same type of characters all the time. Well despite my objections, I will try to be seen as more interested in the well-being of the team, and use my spells to help them quickly. However I will not ride into melee without damn good reason, as I'm pretty much useless there.
danielinthewolvesden 05-06-06, 02:01 PM	Daniel: This is a new campaign, but not a new group, as I have played with and DMed for them all. We of eachother pretty well. I know that the player that complained has some serious issues, suffering from depression and can be very moody at times. Despite this, we've had fun times before and we could probably have it again. I'm going to play with the same people soon anyway, and there I play a LN cleric of St. Cuthbert that is very team and law oriented. So It's not like I play the same type of characters all the time. e. Ah, OK, then it might work out. But as a warning to other players- never run a disruptive PC in your first outing with a new group you haven't gamed with before. No theifs, PKers, Evil when everyone else is Good, lonewolves, etc. Make an effort to be part of the team, BIGtime.
FriendoftheDork 05-07-06, 05:51 AM	Ah, OK, then it might work out. But as a warning to other players- never run a disruptive PC in your first outing with a new group you haven't gamed with before. No theifs, PKers, Evil when everyone else is Good, lonewolves, etc. Make an effort to be part of the team, BIGtime. Yeah, not bad advice.
FriendoftheDork 05-09-06, 10:44 AM	:bump: Ok please Isshia I'd like a response before I let the topic rest.