Post/Author/DateTime	Post
#1 badger47 Mar 04, 2012 13:33:14	I need some advice on a sitsuation i'm in on a game i'm playing with some friends. I am a human Wizard that specilizes in Necromancy. I also serves as the party's glass cannon for the most part. The thing is eveyone is travelling to stop the main antagonist from destroying the world. I just joined them because they rescued my from slavery in a town. Sad thing is there is a paladin(In IRL he's one of my close friends) and a cleric and we argue constantly. The rest of the party is fine. There is even a bard that is a dirgesinger. But anyways so everyone just wants to stop this evil guy. Except I don't really care. My whole goal is just to get more powerful and my ulitmate goal is become a lich. So i really don't care if we stop this guy or if people get killed. While we were camping one night i was dragged away by several skeletons and brought to the main antagonist himself. He asked me to join him. I, liking to be on the winning side, decided too. This was my DM's idea by the way. Since I joined he gave me lots more power. That made my level up a couple levels past everyone else in the party. When i asked what he wanted me to do he said you will know the time to act. So i'm just asking what should i do. I've returned to my party and no body knows about what happened. Should I continue with them and act like i'm still with them or what? My character dosen't care what happenes to the party and he is dead set now on betraying them pretty much.
#2 crimsyn Mar 04, 2012 15:39:20	Okay, I hate to tell anyone they're playing D&D wrong, but this doesn't seem to be a healthy way of playing unless everyone is cool with it. First off, when you're putting together a party, it's best to pre-arrange things with each other so that your character backgrounds are compatible and you have some reason to be together.  Otherwise, you have a fractitious party with no common goals and the potential for party splits or worse, backstabbing and PvP (which D&D isn't really meant for and which many players can get easily frustrated with).  Plently of DMs, including myself, have a "no evil" rule to prevent this kind of intra-party conflict from occurring.  It's no fun for players with good characters who want to go be heroic and fight the BBEG to have to deal with backstabbers, griefers, people who say yes to the BBEG's "join me and we can rule the world together" bullshit, and the damn rogue who constantly needs to be bribed with treasure so he doesn't leave the party to spend the whole session engaging in pickpocketing and petty theft.  And sometimes character concepts are very incompatible to begin with.  Some lawful good religious types who don't take kindly to necromancy and a necromancer aren't going to get along, so you probably need to be very careful when mixing and matching things like that. Seems like a necromancer whose main motivation is to become a lich and is in cahoots with the BBEG to betray the party is plainly evil. Secondly, how the heck does nobody know what happened?  Were you dragged off by these skeletons so quietly that it didn't wake you up, and returned so quickly that you made it back before anyone else woke up?  Does no one, not even the cleric with the (presumably) sky-high insight or the bard with his social skills notice that you're plotting to backstab them, or that you look like you're carrying around a secret? My first rule for doing things like this is don't.  My second rule is that the rest of the party isn't stupid.  If everyone in the party is noticing that things just keep going missing and the sneaky rogue pickpocket has a backpack full of unaccounted-for treasure which is identical to the things that went missing, even the dumb fighter is going to figure out sooner or later that maybe the party thief is stealing things.  Similarly, the rest of the party is going to figure out sooner or later that the evil necromancer who wants to become a lich and disappeared one night only to reappear with more power and the only one who could possibly give him that power is the evil BBEG is probably evil and working with the BBEG. I don't want to stereotype you based on one post, but playing evil characters requires a level of maturity and control.  You can't just go around murdering people or backstabbing and causing trouble for the rest of the party, because that isn't teamwork.  It's acting out anti-social fanatasies and burdening the rest of the party with finding a way to deal with it.  It's taking over the game and griefing the people who want to have fun working together in a heroic setting (which, obviously if people want to play as good clerics and paladins, that's what they had in mind). However, if you really want to play a necromancer, it could potentially be salvageable.  For example, I had a friend who was insistent that he wanted to play a necromancer.  So, I helped him write a backstory which made sense and explained why a necromancer joined up with a party to kill zombies.  He was more of a reluctant necromancer - he left necromancy school after he saw some terrible necromantic stuff happen to his friends, and now he is out adventuring to put as much distance between him and the evil necromancy school filled with powerful wizards who don't like that he deserted the school as possible, and to help stamp out the irresponsible use of necromancy - which, sometimes is like fighting fire with fire.  Because everyone in the party is a fairly mature role-player, it actually worked.  And it put on another layer of role-playing as he didn't want to bust out his powerful necromantic spells in public, for obvious reasons (especially considering the setting was a town which was under siege by zombies). I'd go for something like this - figure out a cool backstory that explains why you're not a run of the mill evil necromancer.  Where did you get your powers?  Why were you enslaved?  How do you feel about that?  Maybe your character is struggling between good and evil?  Maybe he wants to be good, but is constrained by the nasty nature of his powers and training, and the temptations of the dark arts?  Maybe instead of backstabbing the party, your character is debating whether to backstab the BBEG instead?  This could make for some interesting role-playing, especially if the party is suspicious (which they should be, unless the rest of the party are naive morons). You don't have to be a goody two-shoes, but it would make more sense to play a dark hero than an evildoer if that's what you're going for. Also, seriously look into the Archlich epic destiny in Arcane Power.  It might be something you want to work towards, and won't be so incompatible with the party's goals. If it's not salvageable, you might have to roll up a new character.  Maybe someone who was a witness to what went down, who warns the party of the upcoming treason.  Then the party can fight and kill the evil necromancer, and continue with their business as a party.
#3 crimsyn Mar 04, 2012 15:51:58	From Arcane Power: ARCHLICH You fail to remain living, but also fail to die. Undead, you ensure your ability to defend against evil forever. Prerequisites: 21st level, any arcane class You pursue eternal life as an undead creature. Most wizards who search for and achieve easy immortality by way of esoteric necromantic texts are evil, avaricious spellcasters who stop at nothing to achieve their ultimate goals. For some, that goal is lichdom itself.  But you have a greater, nobler purpose. Unlike many who have become liches before you, you have trained your mind to avoid succumbing to the madness that necromantic preservation often brings. For instance, you did not perform the foul ritual that traded your life for animation the moment you found it; you waited until your power was equal to the change. Nor did you accept the aid of Orcus, Demon Prince of the Undead, to empower the ritual, but you waited to find methods outside his control. In doing so, you escaped his touch, though you bear his personal enmity to this day. IMMORTALITY? When you complete your final quest, an age of the world concludes. It is time to make way for new heroes. However, you do not go too far.  You watch the world and all that goes on upon it by means of a cadre of spies and magical sensors. You reside in a secluded citadel deep underground or in a far corner of one of the planes. You are content to let the events of the world roll on, watching; however, you are not completely indifferent. Now and then, you can provide a clue to help those in need.
#4 Cohen95 Mar 04, 2012 21:22:35	I need some advice on a sitsuation i'm in on a game i'm playing with some friends. I am a human Wizard that specilizes in Necromancy. I also serves as the party's glass cannon for the most part. The thing is eveyone is travelling to stop the main antagonist from destroying the world. I just joined them because they rescued my from slavery in a town. Sad thing is there is a paladin(In IRL he's one of my close friends) and a cleric and we argue constantly. Necromancers are not required to be evil. The best necromancers I've seen played are more Neutral than anything. They honestly just don't care about anything, for better or worse, good or evil, other than to pursue their own knowledge (arguably neutral evil, but still). The rest of the party is fine. There is even a bard that is a dirgesinger. But anyways so everyone just wants to stop this evil guy. Except I don't really care. My whole goal is just to get more powerful and my ulitmate goal is become a lich. So i really don't care if we stop this guy or if people get killed. You should care! If you all don't stop this guy, then when you eventually do become a lich, you'll already have a rival! And one with a massive head-start on you! You can't have that, now can you? So you must aid these noble hearts on their quest to stop this future rival of yours so that when you become powerful enough to become a lich, you'll have people to lord your power over. What's the point of being all-powerful if you don't have anybody to hold it over? While we were camping one night i was dragged away by several skeletons and brought to the main antagonist himself. He asked me to join him. I, liking to be on the winning side, decided too. This was my DM's idea by the way. Since I joined he gave me lots more power. That made my level up a couple levels past everyone else in the party. When i asked what he wanted me to do he said you will know the time to act. So i'm just asking what should i do. I've returned to my party and no body knows about what happened. Should I continue with them and act like i'm still with them or what? My character dosen't care what happenes to the party and he is dead set now on betraying them pretty much. Duh, dude. Of course you betray him. Kind of obvious.
#5 white_lightning Mar 04, 2012 23:40:08	One option to consider OP is using your party members as bait for betraying the main antagonist. You act as if you are on their side then at the last moment you betray them and fight along side the party. This way you could chalk it up in a RP fashion as you wanted to gain emense power but then realized serving under the main antagonist was just another form of slavery. As well you could also make this to perhaps gain valuable information on your road to becoming a lich or if anything, gain some new powers, artifact or whatever your DM may consider as something to steal from the main antagonist.
#6 Unahim Mar 05, 2012 9:12:44	Don't betray the party, betray the BBEG instead. Others have already pointed out why this is the better course of action, both IC and OOCly ^^
#7 wystenv2 Mar 05, 2012 13:12:12	The real thing is, being evil for the sake of being evil is silly in itself. Afterall, this guy is obivously trying to destory the world, even other evil people should care about that simply by the merit it will have a direct effect on their future and will inhibit their own desires. That fact alone should allow you to begrudingly act with the party, even if you would love nothing better to stick the knife in their backs you have to recongise that evil people will often torriate less evil to achieve a mutrally benfical goal. Easpically Lawful Evil characters that will use the laws established to gain advantage, but will do it in a cunning, way off into the future manner that any accomplying cohorts won't see coming.  Unless of course, you want the world to end, then you both have aligned interests and you should just wait for the right moment to spring your trap.
#8 crimsyn Mar 05, 2012 22:04:41	Unless of course, you want the world to end, then you both have aligned interests and you should just wait for the right moment to spring your trap. No, he shouldn't.  That's basically griefing.  And if it's what his character would do, he needs to re-evaluate his character's backstory and motivations.
#9 wystenv2 Mar 06, 2012 2:58:01	Unless of course, you want the world to end, then you both have aligned interests and you should just wait for the right moment to spring your trap. No, he shouldn't.  That's basically griefing.  And if it's what his character would do, he needs to re-evaluate his character's backstory and motivations. But one can say that to do that would be influencing his character motives. If he geninuely from the start wanted to destory the world, theres his oppterunty right there unless he has objections about the way it's done, where his slaver past can influence how exactly he handles the decision. A big epic betrayal could be exactly what he ordered (one campaign, the employer who asked them to recover his sword then went on to kill every PC so he wouldn't have to pay them, perfectly in character for a tyrent), easpically since now he has taken the power the big bad might have gained a degree of control over his actions anyways to take the choice out of his hands for accepting. Which raises several questions and probably enables the cleric and Paladin to exterminate his character in a lawful manner. And of course, frankly the cercumstances sarrounding this transfer of alligence are dodgy at best (I mean, seriously, kidnapping him from camp in the middle of the night? Whats stopping him from killing absolutely everyone right there and then? Why did no one hear e.c.t.) and the party should by all means not work without serious throught (Good celrics don't really torrierate necromanchers. They are everything  they are not. Selfish people with a desire to maniuplate the bodies of the deceased.) so of course throughts need to be given to your own motivations, mainly whether you are onboard with the big boss at all or used him to try and gain more power that might backfire at a later date.
#10 crimsyn Mar 06, 2012 13:43:02	But one can say that to do that would be influencing his character motives. If he geninuely from the start wanted to destory the world, theres his oppterunty right there unless he has objections about the way it's done, where his slaver past can influence how exactly he handles the decision. A big epic betrayal could be exactly what he ordered (one campaign, the employer who asked them to recover his sword then went on to kill every PC so he wouldn't have to pay them, perfectly in character for a tyrent), easpically since now he has taken the power the big bad might have gained a degree of control over his actions anyways to take the choice out of his hands for accepting. Which raises several questions and probably enables the cleric and Paladin to exterminate his character in a lawful manner. And of course, frankly the cercumstances sarrounding this transfer of alligence are dodgy at best (I mean, seriously, kidnapping him from camp in the middle of the night? Whats stopping him from killing absolutely everyone right there and then? Why did no one hear e.c.t.) and the party should by all means not work without serious throught (Good celrics don't really torrierate necromanchers. They are everything  they are not. Selfish people with a desire to maniuplate the bodies of the deceased.) so of course throughts need to be given to your own motivations, mainly whether you are onboard with the big boss at all or used him to try and gain more power that might backfire at a later date. I don't know, I believe that it is the responsibility of the player to create a character whose motives aren't in conflict with the group.  If your character is an evil jerkwad who is trying to destroy the world, it is impossible to not be in conflict with the good party.  And this character didn't drop from the sky into the player's lap - the player was the one who created it.  It's like saying "it's not my fault I'm being a jerkwad.  The character who I created and wrote the backstory for and decided to make into a jerkwad just happens to be a jerkwad."  If you create a jerkwad character, you are responsible for its jerkwadishness. Whether I'm on the player or DM side of the screen, I know I don't have much fun when another player is playing a jerkwad character - and I think a lot of players agree with me.  It sucks to have to have to struggle to keep the party together, or keep everyone from killing each other.  Sure, the jerkwad character might be loving every minute of trolling and griefing the rest of the party, but if your fun is negatively affecting everyone else's fun, that's a problem. And it becomes doubly problematic because the good players can't really do much about it.  You're all sitting around the table together at the same time IRL, so it's not like the good players can kick you out of the party or murder you and leave your body in the ditch.  This dynamic, where all the characters are stuck together because of player factors IRL, also enables characters to do things which they wouldn't get away with in reality - for example, there is a good chance that in a parallel universe where D&D is real, the cleric and paladin would have murdered the evil jerkwad necromancer and left his body in a ditch a long time ago. If the character is an evil jerkwad who is plotting to betray the party and destroy the world in a party of heroes out to save the world, that is a problem.  It's far better to play a dark hero like the archlich from arcane power or something to that effect.  That's also pretty cool, you get to have the dark necromancer flavour, and you get to actually work with the party instead of working against it and making it no fun for everyone else.
#11 wystenv2 Mar 06, 2012 14:05:38	I don't know, I believe that it is the responsibility of the player to create a character whose motives aren't in conflict with the group.  If your character is an evil jerkwad who is trying to destroy the world, it is impossible to not be in conflict with the good party.  And this character didn't drop from the sky into the player's lap - the player was the one who created it.  It's like saying "it's not my fault I'm being a jerkwad.  The character who I created and wrote the backstory for and decided to make into a jerkwad just happens to be a jerkwad."  If you create a jerkwad character, you are responsible for its jerkwadishness. Whether I'm on the player or DM side of the screen, I know I don't have much fun when another player is playing a jerkwad character - and I think a lot of players agree with me.  It sucks to have to have to struggle to keep the party together, or keep everyone from killing each other.  Sure, the jerkwad character might be loving every minute of trolling and griefing the rest of the party, but if your fun is negatively affecting everyone else's fun, that's a problem. And it becomes doubly problematic because the good players can't really do much about it.  You're all sitting around the table together at the same time IRL, so it's not like the good players can kick you out of the party or murder you and leave your body in the ditch.  This dynamic, where all the characters are stuck together because of player factors IRL, also enables characters to do things which they wouldn't get away with in reality - for example, there is a good chance that in a parallel universe where D&D is real, the cleric and paladin would have murdered the evil jerkwad necromancer and left his body in a ditch a long time ago. If the character is an evil jerkwad who is plotting to betray the party and destroy the world in a party of heroes out to save the world, that is a problem.  It's far better to play a dark hero like the archlich from arcane power or something to that effect.  That's also pretty cool, you get to have the dark necromancer flavour, and you get to actually work with the party instead of working against it and making it no fun for everyone else. I agree generally, I have very little to disagree with in regards to that on the assumption the character doesn't know how to roleplay evil properly. In all honesty, I've seen assissins work with celrics and never get called on it, but in the star wars RPG I can't find anyone who can roleplay a more misguided character in a proper manner. I have had too many crazy Jedi who I would have simply killed if my character had been in a postion to count (and nowadays I would probably kill them personally ingame before I even finish hearing their backstory, such is my resentment towards old age Jedi force wizards, since all of them have been crazy) Just as said, if the GM didn't enforce the party togetherness rule (all good, all neutral or all evil.) then it's only natural things continue to their eventral conclusion. That way all involved can learn not to do it again. As said, I am curious on how  the situation will deveop.
#12 Krusk Mar 06, 2012 14:55:01	This is a situation you are in because of your PC. You need to come up with motivations to care about the same things as the rest of the group. They can help you, and thats nice of them, but in the end its on you.  Some sample ones that might help BBEG is evil, but that doesn't make you friends. You object to something he does, and think its terrible and must be stopped Jealous of his power. no one should be more powerful than you. Owe the party. You owe the party for saving you, and have sworn a debt to them. You do what they ask because they ask. Go watch helsing and use his motivation for serving Sir Integra.  Attempting to reform. You view your power as a curse, and are trying to use it for good. Intention being that you have an alignment shift at some point after someone redeems you. Its the only thing that challenges you. You need a challenge, and nothing is tougher than the evil dude. you fight him because you enjoy a difficult challenge. His evilness has nothing to do with it.
#13 af468 Mar 06, 2012 21:13:57	You'd need to talk to your dm about this, but what if your necro helped kill the old one to gain power and the enemy attacked him in his dying moment. Then your character is dying but exposed to the decaying necromantic webs of his enemy. 'Help me' he says to his friends. They put you on the throne of the necro you killed and Mwahahaha! You have taken his power! YOU BECOME A LICH! Then your current character becomes the new supervillain, the party feels responsible and must stop him and you roll up a new character that better fits the campaign.
#14 tubaman Mar 07, 2012 12:06:19	i feel the need to point out to both the OP and Cohen95: pursuing power isn't a goal.  Becoming a Lich isn't a goal.  Not caring about anything except power is stupid and pointless.  If thats the way you play, i'm sorry if i offended you, but i can't think of any other word for it except stupid. power and being a lich are a MEANS to a goal. what are you gaining power FOR? what will becoming a lich HELP YOU TO DO? OP, you really ought to come up with some sort of motivation, because gaining power/becoming a lich ISN'T a motivation, its no more a motivation than wanting a flaming sword.  The flaming sword will help you do what you wanted, but if that's your overall goal....well, if your overall goal is to get a flaming sword (or its similar ideas, "gain power" and become a lich), then how can anyone involve you in a meaningful, team-based game? There's a reason all the big bad guys in the movies and books have goals of "take over X (usually the world)" or "destroy X (usually the world)" - THOSE are goals (evil goals, sure, but goals nonetheless)....they still need to gain power, but you can bet they have their eyes on the prize.  The good guys, on the other hand, have different goals, but again, they STILL have goals.  Whether the goal is "save the world (from threats both numerous and endless)" or even "i don't want to die (which requires gaining power to thwart the people wanting to destroy the world, and thus kill you)"