Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 chanter_hound Apr 16, 2010 14:31:04	So I'm my 2.0 campaign I've started playing a necromancer. (see 2.0 Called shots).. And I've just found out one of the players who couldn't be there last time, is to be playing a Paladin. Now he should know that there is a necromancer in the party.. which is probbally why he is playing a paladin. And as we all know, These two classes just don't get along. Now I have a zombie I raised named Bob, who is our packmule. I was going to kill him eventually, as he smells bad and I'm not a typical "lets raise a bunch of zombies and kill the villages." kind of necromancer. In fact, I hate those kinds. (and activally presue them to kill them off.) But I'm sure that the paladin is going to want to attack me. Cause I've got both stealth abilities (Black book, spells and magic. ) and I'm a necromancer. Cept I'm not evil I'm actually true neutral, as my deity is the God of Death. I'm thinking of countering this metagaming thing, with a little metagaming myself. My Necromancer is actually one of the strongest fighters we have (I axed out every bit of magic to do it except necromancy) But I doubt the paladin's player knows that. He probally assumes my necromancer is like one of the other peoples necromancers who was a bit of a weakling and couldn't take 20 damage at level 6. (I've got 50hp at level 4.) So my plan is to lead him into this. Pretend to be a very weak typical necromancer, my character did drink out a bar the night before. (Amazing what 20 con and some poison resistance can do)  So, he'll have a hangover. One that he can easily dispell away with magic, or actually apply a con check to ignore it. I wait for the paladin to eventually contront me, and attack me. He'll try to detect evil, but my character wears a mask. So he might actually just assume I'm evil as Bob is near by. At which point I either allow him to attack me (Then and only then do I use self defense.) If he kills me, then he did an evil act willingly and knowingly.. and my character rises back up a few minutes later.. now neutral evil and pissed off. If not, I kill him or he backs down. Either way, I'm hoping that it won't have to come to that, but this is the guy who does everything "in character" In other words, the player who would play chaotic stupid to kill the entire party.
#2 Morgothra Apr 16, 2010 14:39:59	Wouldn't it be easier for you, and especially the rest of the party plus the DM, to simply take this guy aside for a minute and tell him that you are not evil and you'd rather have them get on for the sake of the game? That way you can avoid all this conflict and continue with D&D, instead of having to fight which only ends up in distress for the entire party and the DM who just want to play.    Seriously, if you see conflict just talk to the guy out of game and explain things, only after that, if he still attacks you can you fight. Before that you are both in the wrong if you fight as you are ignoring the effect on the other people who are taking part. Be the bigger man and just talk him out of it.   All the best,    -Morgothra
#3 CCS Apr 16, 2010 15:25:14	He'll try to detect evil, but my character wears a mask. ??  Ok, it's been a qood while since I played 2e, but I don't recall how you wearing a mask would interfere with the results of "detect evil". He detects, you don't show up as evil - because you're not. Unless you meant that the mask might lead him to not bothering with the detect in the 1st place. One would also think that a paladin might have some knowledge of the various religions/factions/etc operating in his world.  Or at least his local area.    So couldn't it be plausable that he'll recognize your characters sect?  You should ask your DM about this - not begin by plotting how to kill/topple the palidin. Of course I think we all recognize the truth here though.  And that is that you really want to play an evil necromancer & are just looking for a way to get it into play.....
#4 chanter_hound Apr 16, 2010 15:59:03	The mask might lead him to belive that I show up as neutral because its protecting my alignment. Like a neckless of protection from detect alignment. And no. I don't want to play the evil necromancer am looking for a way to get it into play. I was here before the paladin was even anounced to be played. The truth is, I fully belive he decided to play a paladin just so he can have an excuse to attack the me. I've seen him attack players in every campain he has played with me in. The first time it was me, and he started blasting my character with magic missle (A lupin) while we where fighting werewolves, leading the DM at that time to have to pull him aside and give him something to make him heal my character. The second time, he attacked another person because some relic thing disappeared and he blamed that character for it. (cause the character hit it with a spell.) Both times, I'd say he was playing In character, which is why this is very distressing for me. Cause I expect him to fully be "in character" with the paladin and start attacking me, the necromancer. (Though half the party are various kinds of beastly characters now.)
#5 salla Apr 16, 2010 16:00:44	Instead of going all paranoid here, why not just talk to the guy OOC and explain all this to him?  Acting like you have something to hide is just going to provoke him.
#6 nikitadarkstar Apr 16, 2010 16:33:11	I'm doing something similar in a 3.5 campaign actually, playing a wizard specialized in the necromancy school (and don't give me the bull that divine necromancers are better... rebuke undead is not everything >.<) and we got a paladin in the party too. Now sure the paladin didn't know my necromancer was a necromancer for quite some time because he doesn't show up as evil (true neutral, was good for abit, until he lost his temper and smacked a bad guy with a fleshshiver spell.. bad guy didn't survive that one..) and he keeps his spell book to himself and doesn't have anything on him with a necromancy aura. But even after the paladin found out he simply accepts that Damon is actually a necromancer and leaves him alone because he's actually overall a fairly decent person. He's saved the paladins ass a few times, he's not of the "lets raise an undead amry and take over the world!" variety and he actually fights against necromancers (well the ones of the "lets raise an undead army and take over the world!" variety atleast.). Now this is obviously only possible because the guy who plays the paladin doesn't play the "Lawful stupid" kind, and my necromancer actually doesn't go around dragging zombies around and throwing curses left and right. Ofcourse the paladin most likely would turn on my character as soon as he started to turn to evil, but then again if he started to turn to evil he'd probably go for the paladin right away too, but they compromise and get along. So see if your paladin is willing to actually play one who uses his brain and sees to the greater good, at the very least can get to "Leave him alone for now because he's usefull in the overall picture and deal with him later or when he becomes a problem." Just because you're good and got a code to follow doesn't mean you're stupid. >.<
#7 oxybe Apr 16, 2010 18:41:10	step 1 to group cohesion: make characters that would actually work together. step 2 to group cohesion: verify that step 1 is true. if not, repeat step 1 until true...
#8 chanter_hound Apr 16, 2010 21:09:09	I'm doing something similar in a 3.5 campaign actually, playing a wizard specialized in the necromancy school (and don't give me the bull that divine necromancers are better... rebuke undead is not everything >.<) and we got a paladin in the party too. Now sure the paladin didn't know my necromancer was a necromancer for quite some time because he doesn't show up as evil (true neutral, was good for abit, until he lost his temper and smacked a bad guy with a fleshshiver spell.. bad guy didn't survive that one..) and he keeps his spell book to himself and doesn't have anything on him with a necromancy aura. But even after the paladin found out he simply accepts that Damon is actually a necromancer and leaves him alone because he's actually overall a fairly decent person. He's saved the paladins ass a few times, he's not of the "lets raise an undead amry and take over the world!" variety and he actually fights against necromancers (well the ones of the "lets raise an undead army and take over the world!" variety atleast.). Now this is obviously only possible because the guy who plays the paladin doesn't play the "Lawful stupid" kind, and my necromancer actually doesn't go around dragging zombies around and throwing curses left and right. Ofcourse the paladin most likely would turn on my character as soon as he started to turn to evil, but then again if he started to turn to evil he'd probably go for the paladin right away too, but they compromise and get along. So see if your paladin is willing to actually play one who uses his brain and sees to the greater good, at the very least can get to "Leave him alone for now because he's usefull in the overall picture and deal with him later or when he becomes a problem." Just because you're good and got a code to follow doesn't mean you're stupid. >.< Yeah I'm hoping he isn't going lawful stupid on me. But I have a feeling, as every time I've played with him, he is an instigator of problems. As I've said, he has attacked party members in both of the adventures I've played with him, So no. This isn't paranoia, but a logical conclusion of events of identifying how he plays, and what is the most common pattern. I mean, if the party is like a minotaur barbarian, and a wolfen necromancer.. is the first thing you think of playing a lawful good paladin? I won't be "Acting" like I have something to hide. I will simply put my character on the table as he is.
#9 nikitadarkstar Apr 16, 2010 21:22:23	Sounds like it's about time the group sat him down and had a talk to him about his playstyle, or the DM  doesn't let him play aligments like "lawful good" or "chaotic evil" until he learns to play sometihng less extreme (since those two seems to cause most people the most problems). But I hope you can sort this out one way or another.
#10 skibo_the_first Apr 16, 2010 22:09:20	I don't suffer problem players. Kill him if you must. At some point you have to realize that D&D is a roleplaying game. Roleplaying is an important part of it, but it's still a game. And killing other people's characters is bad gamesmanship, pure and simple. Whether it's correct roleplaying or not.
#11 chaosturtle Apr 16, 2010 23:00:47	Sounds like something of an extreme preemptive strike, I mean the guy hasn't even entered the game yet and you're already planning on how to kill him for something he might not even do to you.  That being said though, if he has a track record for these kinds of things I wouldn't say you're in the wrong for wanting to be prepared...I just think you're going about being prepared the wrong way.  You kill his paladin...yay, he makes a new char...you really think he won't make a character not only specifically designed to be an antagonist with you, but specifically designed to be able to kill your character?  Its an out of game issue, it sounds like he listens when the DM gets on his case about it, I'd suggest talking to your DM and having him give a warning if he tries to start something...I'd also make it known ASAP that your character is neutral, maybe when the character is introduced have the DM describe him seeing everyone's aura's with his detecto vision and clearly seeing that you aren't evil.
#12 chanter_hound Apr 16, 2010 23:45:02	The DM has gotten on him about rules lawyering a couple of times. but he still does.  No, I'm not too foolish to belive that he won't try it again. But it will become a little more blantant If every character he makes tries to kill my character. Also, I'm not doing anything unless he does something. The DM for one of the previous campains, is actually set up as well, as he knows this would probally be a problem.
#13 inarai Apr 17, 2010 1:32:54	Couldn't you just explain that attacking another party member would be bad for the game?  In-character conflict can be fun - but only when it doesn't cause problems like the characters trying to kill each other.  That's a very bad thing.
#14 chaosturtle Apr 17, 2010 13:23:55	The DM has gotten on him about rules lawyering a couple of times. but he still does.  No, I'm not too foolish to belive that he won't try it again. But it will become a little more blantant If every character he makes tries to kill my character. Also, I'm not doing anything unless he does something. The DM for one of the previous campains, is actually set up as well, as he knows this would probally be a problem. It sounds like its already blatent enough, especially if the DM previously dealt with a situation in which he had to pull the guy aside and say "don't attack people" seeing as that worked the first time, I'd suggest just doing that again, and if he still tries to attack you the DM can just say no before the action begins.
#15 chanter_hound Apr 18, 2010 2:14:39	When did pulling him aside and saying "Don't attack people" work the first time? Cause it didn't, nor did anything work this time. Lemme give you a few things on him through this session. First he played Calivilier instead of paladin.. cause paladin had a  few more restrictions and not all the super neato stuff he wanted from this Calivlier. He is playing a Drow. Has 19 str, and 20 dex. Unless I missed something, it is impossible for drow to have 19 str. Not only that, but he seems to still have full spell resistance, which would make it impossible to cast spells on him. Hes got full plate armor, with a shield, three weapons of choice and a mount. Apperently he still has detect evil or something.. and he has something very obvious to hide. (He showed one person his character sheet at first, so that person can write down the name, but took efforts to hide something on the sheet.) He does about 50 points of damage each attack. (Or he does 25 per 2 attacks.. and gets 2 every round.) Everyone, including the DM after he left, was like "what the duck was that ship?" Oh and when doing a little OOC talk between a friend of mine and why my character doesn't like the name pendragon (Actually he doesn't like penndragoon) This guy took that name specifically for making my character annoyed.** He did everything in his power to screw up not only my necromancer, but most of the party as well. Though because of his choices, no party member is really on his side, and two of us hate him. (His race and his name.) **The reason for the hate against the name Penndragoon, which is often mixed up with Pendragon, is that the backstory of my necromancer is he is from the Triskavanski family, which is like the dark side. Penndragoons are arrogant ****es who are "good" people. Unfortantly this guy doesn't know what an epic trap he has fallen for, one I didn't even set conciously. Because if a Triskavanski finds a penndragoon (Or even a Pendragon) They will always begin to plot to kill them. Which is why I told my friend not to name is Elf Mage|Thief Arther Pendragon, because I was actually going to let the new DM know of this little backstory on my character, and it would just be weird if my necromancer was with a pendragon and getting buddy buddy with them. However with this guy, I have no problem with him being called pendragon, as he won't try to be buddy buddy with me, and I won't be with him. I stay as far away from him as I possibly can every time. If he goes somewhere, I don't go unless i have to. and vice versa.
#16 Breadley Apr 18, 2010 7:51:30	What level is he? None of that sounds remotely legal. Why do you guys tolerate him? Not the PC, the player. If I was the DM, I'd be prettu annoyed at the BLATANT cheating, if nothing else. Are you guys, like, amused by the trainwreck unfolding?
#17 nikitadarkstar Apr 18, 2010 8:00:15	If even the DM is going WTF?! over his character he probably should ask to see his sheet (without anything beeing hiddne), and then probably tear it up and either tell him to remake and do it right this time, or kick him out. I'm with Breadley, why do you tolerate this?
#18 Breadley Apr 18, 2010 8:12:05	Don't get me wrong, some friends do all kinds of stuff to piss each other off for giggles, but this guy just sounds like a jerk. Dare I say, a munchkin?
#19 chanter_hound Apr 18, 2010 9:11:38	Well he was friends with the DM. But after last nights preformance, the DM is ready to smack down the ban hammer on the character. I've actually read through the class itself. Its an overpowered piece of crap. While using his weapon of choice he attacks as though he was 5 levels higher, while mounted this becomes 6. He adds his level into any damage he does. he gains a +1 to hit with three different weapons, later that becomes a +2. He is practically immune to many forms of magic, just from the class itself, never mind his drow traits. And the class gets to roll 2d10 every level for Str, Dex and Con. Once he hits a 100% for it, it increases by 1 point. (Which explains how he has 19 str.) Luckily, he shouldn't be there next week, and when he does come the week after, there is going to be some smack down on him. screw the conumdrum.. Now this has become Dm vs the munchkin. On a side note, I do feel better now for having rolled crazy stats myself and turning myself into a battle priest type necromancer.
#20 kuonji Apr 19, 2010 8:18:06	So basically the short version of this thread is:  One of the other player's PCs habitually attacks other PCs in every game we play. And you need advice? Stop gaming with him. Problem solved.
#21 Kaganfindel Apr 20, 2010 10:44:41	So the guy says to his doctor, "doctor, it hurts when I do this." Why are you spending time with this person?
#22 chanter_hound Apr 20, 2010 12:17:32	Because I like the other people enough to keep playing. He only plays every other week. Its also not like I can just pack up and find another group fairly easily.
#23 nikitadarkstar Apr 20, 2010 12:44:11	I think what he means is why do you as a group tolerate him? If he has a history of doing stuff like that it's a problem for everyone right? And well most DM's I know would never accept someone who can only join every other session regulrarly (sure sometimes you can't go, it happens, but on a regular basis?). Anyway I do hope you get this sorted out.
#24 Kaganfindel Apr 20, 2010 13:09:05	Because I like the other people enough to keep playing. He only plays every other week. Its also not like I can just pack up and find another group fairly easily. Fair enough.  Why is the DM allowing him to play a character that seems specifically designed to disrupt the game by picking fights with your character?  Also, does he go after other people, or just you?
#25 chanter_hound Apr 20, 2010 13:45:20	Actually, yes there is other people. He is a drow.. so my friend playing an elf just compleatly blew him off after asking him if he wanted to get a drink. (drow removed his full face helm.) One of our rangers, who hates the Wemic, and if he ever finds out i'm a lupin, would hate me as well.. also does not like the drow. Will probally also hate our mino if he would have played last night. When we did play, I never gave him a chance to go after my  character, as I had planned to set up my "trap" My character wears a mask to cover his face, and while appearing to be a very generic necromancer, has yet to do anything that would constitute him even the slightest bit of evil. I've helped some villagers that the rest of the party gained up on, because said villagers were bullies. (Gave them healing so they wouldn't die.) I've also used some necromancy to raise a ogre zombie up to clear a path through an avalanche shortly after the rest of the party went on. (Then told him to pull off his head when he was finished.) And the only time I've done anything "dishonorable" I did it while away from the drow. As I've said earlier, I've set a trap. I continue to maintain my neutral alignment as I can, and simply just have to wait until an event happens where I have to use my necromancy and have to do it in front of him. Or wait for him to break character while being "in character". Course, now that I think of it, he did kinda do me a favor by selecting that last name. Simply because now I can explain away various tid-bits of knowledge, some larger changes in how my character operates and other such things being attributed to attempting to be somewhat on the good side of the Pendragon.
#26 salla Apr 20, 2010 23:38:39	I had planned to set up my "trap" And the moment you decided to set up a 'trap', you started being part of the problem.  You're being just as obnoxious as he is, just in a different way.  You're ENCOURAGING him to engage in the behavior you claim is bothering you.  You're literally asking for it, and you're going to whine when you get it. Maybe they should kick both of you out.
#27 calronmoonflower Apr 21, 2010 1:52:52	Looks like you have a cheater rather than just a rules lawer. Try to get along, watch your back, and if he tries something kill the paladin. You might also think about asking the DM to audit his character sheet if shenanigans pop up again.
#28 chanter_hound Apr 21, 2010 9:45:48	I had planned to set up my "trap" And the moment you decided to set up a 'trap', you started being part of the problem.  You're being just as obnoxious as he is, just in a different way.  You're ENCOURAGING him to engage in the behavior you claim is bothering you.  You're literally asking for it, and you're going to whine when you get it. Maybe they should kick both of you out. Salla.. Once again, you compleatly miss the whole point of what I've posted. The "Trap" is actually avoiding any possibility that he can have an excuse to attack my character and still be 'in character'. The trap was that my character is neutral. So if he tries detect evil, he doesn't get the desired response. The trap is about not using necromancy infront of the guy who is in shiney fullplate mail on a horse. The trap is about not using "dishonorable" methods to defeat the monsters while he is around. I even went and killed my zombie packmule I had to try and avoid any in character confontrations. (Course this was also an incharacter choice, as I didn't embalm the zombie so it was rotting and stinking.) By doing so, I have removed several chances for him being able to attack my character. Causing the trap to be sprung requires him to actually attack my character for really no reason what so ever other than just being a jerk. Obviously though, you are trying to tell me that not giving him an incharacter reason to attack me is obnoxious game play, and that it encourages him to be a jerk. So then, you must be trying to say that I should go and give him tons of reasons to attack me in character, or hell, lets just skip the part where I try to wait out the storm until either he does the jerk thing, I'm forced to give him a reason to attack me, or he gets bored with waiting to attack me. Lets just go full tilt and attack him next time we play. Cause thats obviously not obnoxious behavior ecouraging him to engage in behavior that is bothering me. And its totally not asking for it.... NOT! @Calron He is a little bit of both i'm finding. I've really only started in the system, and I've begun to memorize more than he knows. The DM is certianly going to take a look at his sheet. Cause for one, he isn't suppose to have SR or 19 str. Its impossible for him to have 19 str, even with some of his classes overpowered features. (really who the heck throught it was a good idea to give a class the ability to fight 6 levels over his own.. This guy always hits unless he rolls a 1.)
#29 Kaganfindel Apr 21, 2010 9:59:40	"Salla.. Once again, you compleatly miss the whole point of what I've posted." Maybe that's because of the way you worded it.  Not giving him an excuse to come after you isn't setting a trap for him; it's not giving him any excuses to come after you. If you think you can keep that up long term and everyone (including you) is having fun with the game, good on you.
#30 chanter_hound Apr 21, 2010 10:06:54	Nah, I have a bit of a history with Salla of her missing the point of whatever it is I'm trying to post, or other people are trying to post. Yes, I did use the word "trap" as the trap is to make so that if he is trying to attack me, he won't know my full power and he would have to break character to attack me. However, I've quickly learned that even if I fought him at full power, my character will die in one attack by him. (I've only got 50 hp, and he does that every round with his lance.) This is even after removing any sort of cheats he put into his character. Which is why I was actually thinking it was a good thing he picked Pendragon as his last name, because it gave me an in character reason to avoid him and avoid setting off his Paladin senses, rather than essentially breaking character to avoid giving him a reason to attack me. So for the most part, I'm in the clear for now with his character, in character. However, he changed his focus to my other party member who always plays elves. Elves typically hate Drow, and so that is exactly how my friend is playing his elf. And the whole OOC thing, yeah. People are talking back and forth right now in emails with him. My friend unfortantly doesn't have the internet so he is kinda out of the loop in that.
#31 Kaganfindel Apr 21, 2010 11:33:30	The more you tell us about this group, the more I think you'd all be better served by a game system that is more competitive than cooperative, since making compatible characters seems to be something you all actively avoid.  Have a look at Paranoia, and see if it's to your liking.
#32 chaosturtle Apr 21, 2010 22:25:23	Hise use of the cavalier class sounded really fishy to me...so I dug out my old fighters handbook.  I'm pretty sure I have the paladin version somewhere, but I poked around online and was told that the fighter version just got reprinted in the paladin one, so it should hopefully be the same, maybe the paladin one is worded poorly or something, but he's clearly misinterperting this six level thing.  All of the cavalier bonuses do include mention of six levels...but its just in terms of progression.  They get a +1 with a lance for every six levels starting at first, then at 3rd they get +1 with a chosen sword group which improves at every six levels.  The book also clearly stated that its only to attack rolls, not damage.  In any event, it seems like he took the "improves every six levels" bit to mean "improves as though the character were six levels higher" Going through the negative bits...he has to always attack the biggest, most powerful looking person...so if you ever have anyone on your side that looks physically more imposing then you, you'll be safe.  If you can become under his charge you're also good as he's forced to protect you...so basically, just get him to swear an oath to be loyal to the party, then if he breaks it he's stripped off all his cavalier related powers making him not a threat.  Technically the first time he breaks a part of the code the dm is only supposed to give him a warning but *shrugs* given his past behavior and what not I don't see the DM minding skipping that part....really the best thing would just remind him of his code right before he does something, then if he continues to do that action anyway strip him of his class.  *Edit* Oh right, forgot to comment on the stats...nothing the cavalier has mentions being able to improve your stats, and unless I'm very much mistaken a Drow would only get a +1 to dex, so he wouldn't be able to get to 20, and obviously the 19 strength just isn't possible.  I'm not sure if they changed it in the pally version so the cavalier had to have the usual pally requirements and sadly I forgot to check earlier...but if so along with those super stats he'd need to have 17 cha, meaning he'd have at least 3 stats with 17+, which while not impossible for rolling up stats is a pretty impressive feat...but given his cheater status *shrugs* its not that big of a leap to accuse him of fudging his stats.  Also, I'm fairly confident Drow only got 50% magic resistance, if that...it certainly wasn't a full 100%.
#33 chanter_hound Apr 21, 2010 22:57:01	He's pulling the class from Unearthed arcana. Which I think is technically a first edition book.. Which is the pally version of the class. Yes, he does still has to go after the biggest threat. Which means that if he was to gain an in character reason to attack me.. ( I do something that is questionably evil in front of him) I'll still be seen as the biggest threat until another player steps in. The old edition drows have similar stats to those in 3.5. (Dex/Cha go up, and con goes down.) Getting him to swear an oath while, it could work, wouldn't be in character for me. First off he is a shiny tin can, which are almost always paladins or selfrightous individials. After all, he always has to have the best armor. If worse comes to worst, this means that the best way to deal with him it to deal with his armor. If I can do that, his capabilities go down, as he is incapable of fighting in lower grade armor as it is below his status. Meaning that the best time to attack him is at night when he has to take the armor off and sleep. (This of course would only happen if my character was killed off previously, or managed to get away when the drow inevitibly goes bezerk.) Otherwise, My character is only following him at the moment to figure out why he didn't attack my character on sight. (Due to the family battle between Penndragoons and Triskavanskis) It may be possible that I can defuse the entire situation mostly, because he didn't take the correct name, and he is also drow. (Penndragoons are all human.)
#34 dslatimore Apr 22, 2010 13:43:51	He's pulling the class from Unearthed arcana. Which I think is technically a first edition book.. Which is the pally version of the class. I've not played earlier editions of D&D, but... wouldn't him pulling his class from a book from a different edition put him on a different power level than the rest of the party? Why not have him make his class from a book from the same edition the rest of you are playing?
#35 chanter_hound Apr 22, 2010 13:52:39	UA was open to anyone who wanted to. The DM has some sort of fusion thing going on between the first three editions. Currently one of the DMs is helping me work on converting the Palemaster PRC from 3.5 into a Kit for 2nd. I'm pretty sure that the DM who is actually running the game is going to lay down some smack down on his class. The rest of the classes in UA are no where near as ridiculous as the Calv. They tried to justify that absured power by putting in the "Code of Honor" the class has to abide by. Course that means that the rest of the party also has to abide by his code, and they don't get crazy bonuses.
#36 sanityfaerie Apr 22, 2010 14:42:02	Oh... codes of honor are fun. - Figure out what his code is. - Find out if it ever gets any catch-22s (ie: I have to protect this person, and mustn't allow them to come to harm, but also mustn't allow them to do thing X) - Get him to swear to protect the party.  "Brave sir knight, you are so very large and imposing - near terrifying in your aspect.  I know that it is silly, as you are travelling as our companion, but I find myself afraid of you.  Still, I have heard that the honor of a cavalier is absolute.  If you could swear that you will not attack us, I would be ever so relieved." - If he won't swear to protect the party, ditch him IC.  If your character wouldn't travel with him, then don't travel with him.  Get the other players together and sneak off in the night if you have to.
#37 chanter_hound Apr 22, 2010 20:32:07	Well, I can't in good concouis get him to swear to protect the party. Not really my characters style. However, IF I can find a way to change his armor from Full Plate into Studded leather, (Armor to protrect bandits, thieves and other riff raff) there will be some sparking there. Also rotting any leather or wood on his equipment should help as well.
#38 navar100 Apr 22, 2010 21:52:06	With DM fiat borrow something from 3E - Deathless.  Deathless are Good-aligned undead.  Have your necromancer be able to create Deathless. Evil likes to corrupt the Innocent.  Good fights back by "corrupting the Guilty".  Instead of the usual path of Redemption, your character has been blessed by a deity, "coincidentally" the paladin's deity, the ability to usurp Evil's power over undead. Having Good undead weakens Evil. Suppose a noble knight has fallen before he could complete his Oath.   You bring him back as a Deathless so that he may complete his Oath.  When the Oath is completed, he gets his Eternal Reward.
#39 requiemofblades Apr 24, 2010 3:31:04	Alternately,If he gets to be too difficult. Soveriegn glue his Armor together. Your choice about whether he is in it at the time or not. Or if you have Arcane rune I think it is,lets you do permanent writing. Write something obnoxious on his shiny plate armor. Something truely repellent...questioning his heritage or something like that. Beyond that,be a little bit evil and slit his throat in his sleep. Have your DM tell him to make a character thats compatible with the group and to make one in front of everyone or with everyone elses input and recommendations. If you don't want to step up to the evil plate,feed his Armor to a Rust Monster.
#40 chanter_hound Apr 26, 2010 2:50:25	Problem with slitting his throat. He is a drow. So he is apperently allowed to meditate in full platemail. And besides its not part of my play style to really attempt anything directly offensive at him. I'm actually now at the point though that I can't really attempt anything, call him out on his choice of rulings ect. Cause I don't want to do what Salla accused me of trying to do from the start, disrupt the game play. Which is why unless it directly effects me, I typically don't challange him on any of his "rulings" as he is the resident rules lawyer. I've just got to tough it out and not do anything blantantly evil in front of him. (though so far, I've really only done good or neutral deeds.) Its odd though, because while his shinanigins are going on, from day one (as in before he showed up) I've been having various sorts of troubles with my character. Mostly because I used the 2.5 Skills and power, and Spells and magic books. When I made him, I built him out of the priest class using the CP. I wanted several things to go into him, the ability to use a scythe and not as a walking stick, the ability to move and tumble, and the ability to cast necromancy spells. My problems are when I start trying to use some manuvers, like "I want to polevalt over this guy using my scythe." I can't do it because I'm not a monk or a fighter. (I have taken both the monks unarmored agility and the warriors thac0 as per the books allow.) I've tried using my skills, which resulted in a stat check followed by the ability check. Normally skills are tied to a stat. So if i want to use a tumble skill, I've got to roll essentially a dex check. But as I'm using the black books, my skills are far lower than what they could have been. (Payoff is in later levels though.) The Minotaur barbarian has used various combat manuvers and only had to roll a dex check to make them, not even have done anything to get the skill as far as i know. Even stranger is the fact I'm not allowed to use a backstab for x2 or x3 damage, but I am allowed to make an attack that instantly kills the target. Part of it is because I'm using books that were sitting on the stack of books they have, but they never really touched. So they don't seem to understand what my character is, and while I've got great combat ability, there are sacrifices I made in order to gain this ability to fight with a scythe. (Dropped every magic except necromancy.) Part of it might be because I'm playing a Lupin character, who works well with half the party who are also all various kinds of animal people. I'm thinking about making a human fighter named Ted and just dropping this character as while I love how my character works and everything it gets draining to explain I have the Jump and Tumble prof, which is what I'd be using to get to the other side of the enemy. Making Ted, the stereotypical human fighter of boring land would after all kill any of the issues I have with the drow paladin. And using just the PHB of 2.0 would kill all the wierd abilities I'd have in order to do things. So I think thats the best solution of all. Just replace my character with something else that isn't so.. exotic.
#41 sockmonkey66 Apr 26, 2010 4:14:18	You shouldn't have to change your character to suit someone else. In any case it's not going to help since the guy has pulled this crap before. You seem a little reluctant to be direct about handling this. Handling this how you want to isn't going to work. Handle this how you need to, even if it makes you uncomfortable.
#42 Kaganfindel Apr 26, 2010 16:36:36	If you're going to change characters, maybe you could involve the DM in the character creation process.  You've made it sound as if he's hacking together his own rules, using pieces of every edition as he sees fit, so maybe the way to make a character that works the way you want it to is to tell him what you want and get him to help you build it.  If it seems at that point that he's trying to stymie you, then you've got your cue to seek out a new game group.
#43 chaosturtle May 01, 2010 2:41:18	If you're going to change characters, maybe you could involve the DM in the character creation process.  You've made it sound as if he's hacking together his own rules, using pieces of every edition as he sees fit, so maybe the way to make a character that works the way you want it to is to tell him what you want and get him to help you build it.  If it seems at that point that he's trying to stymie you, then you've got your cue to seek out a new game group. This.  It sounds like there are quite a few issues in terms of using different rules from not only different books, but different editions.  When I DM, I don't allow for anything that I don't have the capibility to understand...aka, I need to have the visual source of whatever the Pc's want to use, and in return the Pc's have the same access to any house rules/custom stuff that's going to be in the campaign.
#44 chanter_hound May 02, 2010 2:30:55	Well she has every single book I used (Except for the one that has the lupin races, but I bring the portion of the races everytime. The wemic in our party though does most of the stuff that would come up already though.) Its just that her logic train departs the station going east, while mine is going west. I showed her some video clips of scythe fighters, had a little more time to flesh my character's combat ability out as well in combat. So I think she is understanding where i'm coming from, what I'm doing, and where i'm going. Even better though, the Paladin is mellowed out a bit. I managed to clip his constantly growing stats, as he thought they just kept going up and up. (Which if you know about 2nd, they don't usually grow after character creation except for when you find magic items.) And my character has now seen the paladin without his armor, has noted the paladin ignoring certian behavior of mine (I stuffed a dead bear down a hole to make sure nothing came out of it, since the last two holes we past had stuff come out of it. Then we got attacked by something else in the forth hole.) and other wise is compleatly confused by the paladin now soaking up damage that was placed on me. To be fair though, I do have a spell called damage transference that takes wounds from one creature and applies it to me, some see this as a good or chaotic act. I've also finally been able to release the more child-like behavior of my character. (Ie, overly simplistic methods of task execution, having fun sliding down ice slides..)
#45 chaosturtle May 02, 2010 3:39:36	Ahh, dead bear stuffing...is there anything it doesn't solve?