a) We have a Wilden Druid, who just came to Faerun, and for other people he is just some walking tree or bush. So for once, I do not know for sure how his self-image should be, but most important: how do people react to him? Fearful? Just some oddity like many? Negative?
b) Second case is the Tiefling Swordmage. In the old D&D 3.5. Tieflings were just scattered folks with no culture, but I hear they were sort of retconned to once have had an empire. So how do people react to a Tiefling?
c) I am playing a Drow Monk of the Old Order. Now while the Old Order is relatively known, I am unsure. Do people want to kill a Drow on sight, are they just displeased? Does him being a Monk balance it out? I am playing him lawful good and extremely polite, almost more like a priest to make it easier for people to accept me. How do you feel is it appropriate that people react to a Drow Monk in 1479?
The other thing: we have found out to have a mix of good and evil party members. Three, myself included are good, but the Tiefling Swordmage and the Halfelf Warlock are evil. After our first evening of playing, our good party members suspect something, and in one case, when I let some caught enemy go, the Tiefling went after him and killed him, which quite was in contrast to the lawful good moral of me, letting him go for the cooperation. I am unsure how to handle this. By all means we good people could not really group with the two bad guys. I have the feeling it just makes no sense, and generally, isn't Pen and Paper usually way more for good or at least neutral heroes? I mean, you can't really run around and play Darth Vader here.
So, what are your opinions about these two topics?
Thanks in advance.
As for the evil characters, that can be fun but it ussually only works out well if A) everyone in the party is evil. or B) the other characters dont know that the character is evil. But from the sounds of it, theyre not doing a very good job of hiding their evil natures. I say just role play it, what would your character do in a situation where some member of the party is doing evil acts such as killing and looting or killing cute and cuddly kittens? Would you turn a blind eye? Maybe give them a stern talking to?
It sounds like to me that it might lead to a party fight, which can be fun as well, as long as the other players dont take it personally.
I came up with a better idea. I told him that if he plays the race it is very likely when he walks into a city, he is going to be arrested and impounded till his owner wizard can be found as Golems arent usually allowed to walk around on their own.
He decided to look for another race
all evil party, neutral/evil party, all good party etc etc this is a social game where the DM leads - The DM is allowed to have fun as well and so give help him and give him an easier job to do.
Well, our group has just started playing D&D 4e, and we hav encountered some problems. I am the most knowledgable, the others know Faerun only barely, but even my knowledge is only 3.5 via Computer games (Baldurs Gate, Neverwinter Nights asf.). We are quite unsure how people would react to our races in the 4e Faerun setting in 1479?
a) We have a Wilden Druid, who just came to Faerun, and for other people he is just some walking tree or bush. So for once, I do not know for sure how his self-image should be, but most important:
how do people react to him? Fearful? Just some oddity like many? Negative?
b) Second case is the Tiefling Swordmage. In the old D&D 3.5. Tieflings were just scattered folks with no culture, but I hear they were sort of retconned to once have had an empire. So how do people react to a Tiefling?
c) I am playing a Drow Monk of the Old Order. Now while the Old Order is relatively known, I am unsure. Do people want to kill a Drow on sight, are they just displeased? Does him being a Monk balance it out? I am playing him lawful good and extremely polite, almost more like a priest to make it easier for people to accept me. How do you feel is it appropriate that people react to a Drow Monk in 1479?
The other thing: we have found out to have a mix of good and evil party members. Three, myself included are good, but the Tiefling Swordmage and the Halfelf Warlock are evil. After our first evening of playing, our good party members suspect something, and in one case, when I let some caught enemy go, the Tiefling went after him and killed him, which quite was in contrast to the lawful good moral of me, letting him go for the cooperation. I am unsure how to handle this. By all means we good people could not really group with the two bad guys. I have the feeling it just makes no sense, and generally, isn't Pen and Paper usually way more for good or at least neutral heroes? I mean, you can't really run around and play Darth Vader here.
So, what are your opinions about these two topics?
Thanks in advance.
A: I'd say treat with suspicion
b: irelevant, the 4e tiefling does not and never has had an empire of there own.
there were empires that existed that could of spawned the creature though.
c:kill the drow on sight deal blows chunks, a lone drow is no threat. however I'd treat with suspicion until you can prove yourself.
as for your party... not sure there, but I'd warn you, if your evil members of your party go out and murder in a town or city, your wilden just becuase it's diferent and your drow will be first on the suspect list.l
all fun and games, but when one ruins the fun, its no longer entertaining
though if your have a letter of introduction from the head of your order, the guards might treat you a bit better than if you didnt
I had a guy wanting to play a Shardmind in the Realms, and I tried over and over to tell him I dont think they exist in the realms regardless of the fact that they exist in PHB 3
I came up with a better idea. I told him that if he plays the race it is very likely when he walks into a city, he is going to be arrested and impounded till his owner wizard can be found as Golems arent usually allowed to walk around on their own.
He decided to look for another race
I have a Shardmind playing in my FR game, and it's fine. I told the player that he had to come up with his own reason for the character to be in our game, but I mean, the Astral Sea exists in the FR, so why not Shardminds? Moreover, if my Player wants to be a Shardmind, why stop him? It's supposed to be fun.
That said, I do have people constantly asking what the Heck he is. Most assume he's a golem of some kind.
We also have a goblin in our party. Fewer people tend to comment on him, but I will occassionally have an NPC bring up the fact that the party is essentially a bunch of "scummy mercenaries" who aren't above hanging out with an obvious wizard's creation (the Shardmind) as well as a rank goblin. But I try to keep it in moderation. And more to the point, now that the Party is into the Paragon Tier, I assume that most people have heard of them in their city, which alters the way they're treated.
Well, our group has just started playing D&D 4e, and we hav encountered some problems. I am the most knowledgable, the others know Faerun only barely, but even my knowledge is only 3.5 via Computer games (Baldurs Gate, Neverwinter Nights asf.). We are quite unsure how people would react to our races in the 4e Faerun setting in 1479?
a) We have a Wilden Druid, who just came to Faerun, and for other people he is just some walking tree or bush. So for once, I do not know for sure how his self-image should be, but most important: how do people react to him? Fearful? Just some oddity like many? Negative?
Actually, the reaction you are having above sounds excellent! I would guess your average urban Faerunian might stop & say, “What is that walking bush thing? Does it talk too?” Those typically closer to nature (rural communities, elves, etc.) might see him as a nature spirit of some sort, though that could be both good and bad depending on what kind of spirit they think he might be. Academics might classify him as a (male) dryad or advanced golem of some sort. Some people might be fearful, but probably not terrified.
b) Second case is the Tiefling Swordmage. In the old D&D 3.5. Tieflings were just scattered folks with no culture, but I hear they were sort of retconned to once have had an empire. So how do people react to a Tiefling?
The ancient (and fallen) tiefling empire of Bael Turath, wherein the people made diabolic pacts for power, is 4e core fluff…iow, a suggested or sample origin for the race in your game. In FR, Narfell matches that story pretty well with its legends of demonbinding (devil & demon pacts, summoning, etc.), but that doesn’t mean all tieflings on Faerun have this exact background.
FR tieflings are more commonly seen in Narfell & Dambrath (as described above, with Dambrath simply having Nar descendants who traveled south), Imaskar & Tymanther (via the Old Kingdoms that used to be there and divine/diabolic bloodlines), Thay & Aglarond (hello evil wizards & people running away from evil wizards), and Calimshan (nice climate??). FR tiefiings can and do exist in other places as well, but the listed locations are where most of their roots are, per se. In all places they will at times have to deal with their dark and untrusted reputations; many people will probably be wary of them as sly and devious or worse.
c) I am playing a Drow Monk of the Old Order. Now while the Old Order is relatively known, I am unsure. Do people want to kill a Drow on sight, are they just displeased? Does him being a Monk balance it out? I am playing him lawful good and extremely polite, almost more like a priest to make it easier for people to accept me. How do you feel is it appropriate that people react to a Drow Monk in 1479?
Hm…the Old Order is ”relatively known” I guess you could say, but what is relatively known is that there isn’t much known about them, no? So in terms of influencing how people would perceive him, I’d say being part of the Old Order seems fairly neutral (“some old monk order” ) to slightly negative (“some mysterious monk order seeking who knows what” ).
As for looking like a monk, a drow in some type of monkish, simple get-up I think would help abate some of the fear or suspicion and give a better chance at being listened to. Unfriendly rather than hostile, so to speak, or curious rather than unfriendly. Wearing very humble, plain clothing that is probably not black or dark purple or red and that does not look like spell-slinger robes and is not hooded and doesn’t show off spider or web-motifs would probably have a positive effect.
In 1479 drow are likely shocking to see, but there are one or two tales of good drow so those who are unfamiliar with the drow might simply find them scary or suspicious. Not exactly a warm welcome, but nicer than attacking them on sight. In large urban areas they might be more of "just another curiosity," though I would guess still given some space in most cities.
FYI, there is a Dragon article all about FR drow living on the surface called Children of Darkness. You might find it useful. The author mentions that it is those who are familiar with the drow who are much more likely to be hostile.
The other thing: we have found out to have a mix of good and evil party members. Three, myself included are good, but the Tiefling Swordmage and the Halfelf Warlock are evil. After our first evening of playing, our good party members suspect something, and in one case, when I let some caught enemy go, the Tiefling went after him and killed him, which quite was in contrast to the lawful good moral of me, letting him go for the cooperation. I am unsure how to handle this. By all means we good people could not really group with the two bad guys. I have the feeling it just makes no sense, and generally, isn't Pen and Paper usually way more for good or at least neutral heroes? I mean, you can't really run around and play Darth Vader here.
The general assumption is that PCs are Unaligned, Good, or Lawful Good, but some people like evil games so “Pen & Paper” can be whatever one likes…..Darth Vader or otherwise.
However, evil PCs can get complicated very quickly and very easily. This is like one of those points where a DM does something (allows evil PCs) and then writes in to “Save My Game!” Are you DM/player or a player in this game?????Practically speaking, there’s no need to consider D&D at all here. If you were in a group of friends and two of them kept killing people randomly, would you still hang out with them?? You don’t need to be a Lawful Good paladin in a fantasy world to be concerned here!
What’s happened so far doesn’t necessarily have to be game breaking, and actually could make for really interesting story conflict.If you are DMing, you might ask the evil PC players if they have a story arc involving redemption or curbing their evil in mind, like awakening to goodness or begrudgingly (in-character only) developing into an anti-hero type. If they are interested (i.e., you don’t have to force them) in this type of story then the group might be able to work together to tell it (as a subplot of the entire group’s story of course, not the central focus).
If they are only wanting to enjoy playing an evil character, you’ll have to see if the other players and their PCs & stories can be enjoyed at the same time. If playing an evil character to these players means doing whatever they want whenever to whoever, the reality may very well be that this is not the campaign for them. Your group might start up a separate game to accommodate…..perhaps where you are all evil characters. As a last resort, you as DM or all of you as a group might A) decide that they need to roll up new, non-evil PCs or convert their current characters to a non-evil style of play or B) try to split amicably with them and wish them well on their way to another gaming group.
This thread was started a while ago, so replying may just be thought exercise. However, if you're out there, OP, let us know how things are going!
