Couples and Alignment, So Frustrated! - Downloaded from the Wizards Community, all coding removed by Solauren

Couples and Alignment, So Frustrated!

Post/Author/DateTime Post
#1
phoenix_daughter
Apr 30, 2009 8:45:51 There is only one Lawful Good character in my D&D group. He’s an inspiring warlord, and he specializes in healing and helping the fighter and paladin in melee fights. He started out playing as the gullible reckless guy who always got into trouble by doing something stupid like insulting the monster with his Diplomacy check, but then settled down a bit and started working with the party pretty well. Then he invites his girlfriend to play with us. Actually, he said that he had to bribe her to play with us by buying her pink things. I don’t know if he was kidding or not, but she did show up with a set of pink dice and a pink folder for her archer ranger character.

Ugh, couples. They do all those little things, like whispering to each other and giggling, or when cuddling and kissing each other in between turns. That’s annoying, but in their defense, they’re quiet about it, so we can ignore it if we want to. What really bugs me is how he changes his character when playing with her. Our latest mission was to protect a village against a raiding tribe who has been taking crops, cattle, and occasionally people. These people show up fighting in the subsequent raids, but are reluctant fighters. They are being coerced into fighting the people from their own community, and they are called prisoners.

Now, the first problem arose when this warlord used his Diplomacy skill to convince some of the teenage farm boys to join us in the fight, then tasked them with protecting his girlfriend. Now, my character is Neutral aligned, but I disagreed with the idea that protecting these villagers meant getting them killed in battle, especially since his girlfriend’s character has just as high of an AC score as he does and seems perfectly capable of taking care of herself. I argued that they were farm boys, didn't know how to fight, and would be more of a liability than a help. He argued that they had a right to protect their village if they wanted to. So to prove my point, I went over and punched one of the farm boys. Now, to understand this, you have to understand that my character has a Strength modifier of 0. With an unarmed attack, I can do a maximum of 4 points of damage, and my attack was enough to knock the guy unconscious. Yeah, these guys will be a big help in battle.

Predictably, the warlord reacts by tackling my character and tying her up because she’s attacking the villagers. Which is fine, I pretty much expected that; I just wanted to make my point. The second problem, and the one that really bothers me, is that during the battle, this warlord uses his daily power to deal 38 points of damage...to one of the prisoners. I guess he wanted to heal the rest of us, and we really did need it, but he chose to kill one of the villagers to do so. That frustrated me. He treats my Neutral character like a crazy person when she punches a villager and steps in as the good guy who rectifies the situation, but his Lawful Good character can kill the villagers we’re supposed to protect when he deems it necessary? Talk about a double standard.
#2
greebo69
Apr 30, 2009 8:57:59 If the Paladin is willing to essentially sacrifice innocents for the sake of protecting his booty call, then this is an alignment issue that should be addressed by the DM if it continues, IMO.

The Paladin's diety would, in my game, be rather angry at the Paladin for his willingness to sacrifice others.
#3
prator_the_golden
Apr 30, 2009 9:09:53 Based on your description of events, it sounds like you haven't really discussed this problem out of character or outside of game time. Talking to your DM, your friend, and your friend's lady friend about your concerns will at least make them aware that you're annoyed by how things are going, even if none of them take you seriously.

Alternately, you could bring your own "friend" to the game (your choice of gender) and spend the entire session snogging instead of playing. Maybe the game will be more fun that way.
#4
phoenix_daughter
Apr 30, 2009 10:34:22
Based on your description of events, it sounds like you haven't really discussed this problem out of character or outside of game time.

That's correct - this happened very recently. He has shown a tendancy to go along with the neutral (but slightly evil) warlock's plans even though he's supposed to be lawful good, but this is the first time it's been so blatent. It's not that I mind his lawful good character killing people (since how he plays his warlord is his perogative), but I do mind him being the high and mighty moral enforcer with others and then switching to the oh-what-the-heck killer when it's him. I am going to mention it to him privately, but I needed to get the frustration out so that I can be calm and tactful about it.
#5
leowulf
Apr 30, 2009 13:36:49 Getting the locals to protect his sweetie's character was cheesy but understandable. I'd talk to him and the DM together if it bothers you, but really, the DM dividing the XP by 8 instead of 5 is reason enough for the Warlord's player to choose a different tactic to curry favor with his girlfriend. :P

Another thing the DM could do is explain to the player that PC's are materially different from NPC's in 4e, and the girlfriend's character is as heroic as his own or the rest of the party that she's now member of. 4e is a lot more forgiving to N00Bs than 3.x was, so she'll be okay without NPC meat-shields.

The other, very different, issue of killing an NPC to activate a daily to heal the party is a matter for a different discussion. As a LG character, he should have knocked the NPC unconscious - and been apologetic about that - if the daily was going to Save The Party. As DM I would have said something like, "so you're desperate enough to knock him unconscious? I'm assuming you're not killing him - killing off innocents is a good example of alignment drift."

As an aside - maybe this _is_ this alignment drift? The Warlord is listening to the amoral Warlock and the Warlord's player might be working expedient acts into play to represent the fact that he's being corrupted and turning away from his LG base. Since alignment drift doesn't mean much in 4e, it would make an interesting subplot for the character.

As a player I would have asked the DM if I could expend the daily to trigger the healing effect without damaging anyone. There's no reason not to allow it - the "yes and ... " principle at work - and doing the healing thing might make the Warlord's player feel like his PC is cooler.

Just out of curiosity, how does the girlfriend play? Is she getting into the gaming? If so, maybe that will give her boyfriend reason to let her stand on her own and play her character - without a wall of helpful NPC's between her and the game. ;)
#6
phoenix_daughter
Apr 30, 2009 15:35:23
As an aside - maybe this _is_ this alignment drift?

Just out of curiosity, how does the girlfriend play? Is she getting into the gaming? If so, maybe that will give her boyfriend reason to let her stand on her own and play her character - without a wall of helpful NPC's between her and the game. ;)

I don't *think* it's alignment drift, because on other occasions, he's very gung-ho about helping the victims and giving aid to the weak. I think it's more of an excuse. He says that because the warlock has a high bluff score and he has a low insight score, she can 'convince him' to go along with her plans. I did talk to him today, and he killed the prisoner-villager to protect the teenager-villager, who was low on hit points. But he was more in danger of getting knocked unconscious than getting killed. I don't know why he didn't just use two move actions to get the guy out of there (he was directing those NPCs actions). However, I don't think the possibility of asking to do nonlethal damage occurred to him. That would be easy to suggest to do next time.

So far, she's playing pretty well. She keeps to the back and fires arrows, but she's made sure to get some attack bonuses so she usually hits the target. And since she's a striker, she does a lot of damage. Actually, in this encounter, she delivered the killing strike to 3 out of the 4 major foes. So she's really good in large combat situations and doesn't need babysat at all.

Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 phoenix_daughter Apr 30, 2009 8:45:51	There is only one Lawful Good character in my D&D group. He’s an inspiring warlord, and he specializes in healing and helping the fighter and paladin in melee fights. He started out playing as the gullible reckless guy who always got into trouble by doing something stupid like insulting the monster with his Diplomacy check, but then settled down a bit and started working with the party pretty well. Then he invites his girlfriend to play with us. Actually, he said that he had to bribe her to play with us by buying her pink things. I don’t know if he was kidding or not, but she did show up with a set of pink dice and a pink folder for her archer ranger character. Ugh, couples. They do all those little things, like whispering to each other and giggling, or when cuddling and kissing each other in between turns. That’s annoying, but in their defense, they’re quiet about it, so we can ignore it if we want to. What really bugs me is how he changes his character when playing with her. Our latest mission was to protect a village against a raiding tribe who has been taking crops, cattle, and occasionally people. These people show up fighting in the subsequent raids, but are reluctant fighters. They are being coerced into fighting the people from their own community, and they are called prisoners. Now, the first problem arose when this warlord used his Diplomacy skill to convince some of the teenage farm boys to join us in the fight, then tasked them with protecting his girlfriend. Now, my character is Neutral aligned, but I disagreed with the idea that protecting these villagers meant getting them killed in battle, especially since his girlfriend’s character has just as high of an AC score as he does and seems perfectly capable of taking care of herself. I argued that they were farm boys, didn't know how to fight, and would be more of a liability than a help. He argued that they had a right to protect their village if they wanted to. So to prove my point, I went over and punched one of the farm boys. Now, to understand this, you have to understand that my character has a Strength modifier of 0. With an unarmed attack, I can do a maximum of 4 points of damage, and my attack was enough to knock the guy unconscious. Yeah, these guys will be a big help in battle. Predictably, the warlord reacts by tackling my character and tying her up because she’s attacking the villagers. Which is fine, I pretty much expected that; I just wanted to make my point. The second problem, and the one that really bothers me, is that during the battle, this warlord uses his daily power to deal 38 points of damage...to one of the prisoners. I guess he wanted to heal the rest of us, and we really did need it, but he chose to kill one of the villagers to do so. That frustrated me. He treats my Neutral character like a crazy person when she punches a villager and steps in as the good guy who rectifies the situation, but his Lawful Good character can kill the villagers we’re supposed to protect when he deems it necessary? Talk about a double standard.
#2 greebo69 Apr 30, 2009 8:57:59	If the Paladin is willing to essentially sacrifice innocents for the sake of protecting his booty call, then this is an alignment issue that should be addressed by the DM if it continues, IMO. The Paladin's diety would, in my game, be rather angry at the Paladin for his willingness to sacrifice others.
#3 prator_the_golden Apr 30, 2009 9:09:53	Based on your description of events, it sounds like you haven't really discussed this problem out of character or outside of game time. Talking to your DM, your friend, and your friend's lady friend about your concerns will at least make them aware that you're annoyed by how things are going, even if none of them take you seriously. Alternately, you could bring your own "friend" to the game (your choice of gender) and spend the entire session snogging instead of playing. Maybe the game will be more fun that way.
#4 phoenix_daughter Apr 30, 2009 10:34:22	Based on your description of events, it sounds like you haven't really discussed this problem out of character or outside of game time. That's correct - this happened very recently. He has shown a tendancy to go along with the neutral (but slightly evil) warlock's plans even though he's supposed to be lawful good, but this is the first time it's been so blatent. It's not that I mind his lawful good character killing people (since how he plays his warlord is his perogative), but I do mind him being the high and mighty moral enforcer with others and then switching to the oh-what-the-heck killer when it's him. I am going to mention it to him privately, but I needed to get the frustration out so that I can be calm and tactful about it.
#5 leowulf Apr 30, 2009 13:36:49	Getting the locals to protect his sweetie's character was cheesy but understandable. I'd talk to him and the DM together if it bothers you, but really, the DM dividing the XP by 8 instead of 5 is reason enough for the Warlord's player to choose a different tactic to curry favor with his girlfriend. :P Another thing the DM could do is explain to the player that PC's are materially different from NPC's in 4e, and the girlfriend's character is as heroic as his own or the rest of the party that she's now member of. 4e is a lot more forgiving to N00Bs than 3.x was, so she'll be okay without NPC meat-shields. The other, very different, issue of killing an NPC to activate a daily to heal the party is a matter for a different discussion. As a LG character, he should have knocked the NPC unconscious - and been apologetic about that - if the daily was going to Save The Party. As DM I would have said something like, "so you're desperate enough to knock him unconscious? I'm assuming you're not killing him - killing off innocents is a good example of alignment drift." As an aside - maybe this _is_ this alignment drift? The Warlord is listening to the amoral Warlock and the Warlord's player might be working expedient acts into play to represent the fact that he's being corrupted and turning away from his LG base. Since alignment drift doesn't mean much in 4e, it would make an interesting subplot for the character. As a player I would have asked the DM if I could expend the daily to trigger the healing effect without damaging anyone. There's no reason not to allow it - the "yes and ... " principle at work - and doing the healing thing might make the Warlord's player feel like his PC is cooler. Just out of curiosity, how does the girlfriend play? Is she getting into the gaming? If so, maybe that will give her boyfriend reason to let her stand on her own and play her character - without a wall of helpful NPC's between her and the game. ;)
#6 phoenix_daughter Apr 30, 2009 15:35:23	As an aside - maybe this _is_ this alignment drift? Just out of curiosity, how does the girlfriend play? Is she getting into the gaming? If so, maybe that will give her boyfriend reason to let her stand on her own and play her character - without a wall of helpful NPC's between her and the game. ;) I don't think it's alignment drift, because on other occasions, he's very gung-ho about helping the victims and giving aid to the weak. I think it's more of an excuse. He says that because the warlock has a high bluff score and he has a low insight score, she can 'convince him' to go along with her plans. I did talk to him today, and he killed the prisoner-villager to protect the teenager-villager, who was low on hit points. But he was more in danger of getting knocked unconscious than getting killed. I don't know why he didn't just use two move actions to get the guy out of there (he was directing those NPCs actions). However, I don't think the possibility of asking to do nonlethal damage occurred to him. That would be easy to suggest to do next time. So far, she's playing pretty well. She keeps to the back and fires arrows, but she's made sure to get some attack bonuses so she usually hits the target. And since she's a striker, she does a lot of damage. Actually, in this encounter, she delivered the killing strike to 3 out of the 4 major foes. So she's really good in large combat situations and doesn't need babysat at all.