We have 3 new players to D&D in our group, one of which is currently playing an elven monk.
We are adventuring in an abandoned dwarven mine, and the party splits. I go off on my own, and fall to a water trap. I managed to just barely survive by breaking the door and having the water run out. The monk shows up, and throws her necklace of fireballs into the hole I created, with the intent of killing me.
Granted she, being new, didnt know what a +14 Ref Fire Resist 10 and Fast heal 3 can do to stop a necklace of fireballs, but she found out when her necklace only did 3 damage to me. She realizes im not even close to dead, and runs. Sessions ends.
I am extremely furious, for obvious reasons, and now apparently the DM is ruling that her monk is going to beg for mercy, and seek an atonement spell. What ticks me off, is that being a paladin and a saint, the DM is holding the privelege above my head. if I kill the monk, I lose EVERYTHING. whereas if she stays alive, I get to enjoy her getting off scott free.
So my question, do I off the bi$%h or do I let her live
Take the Necklace of Fireballs, for starters.
Of course that's in character. Out of character you need to sit down with the DM and with the Monk's player and discuss what is going.
If the DM lets her off scott free, quit. Seriously, for the DM would then prove he cares nothing at all for you.
In game- Why did the elf want you dead. I presume she was not evil. There has to be a reason to why she would do that. But that aside, the session ended with her trying to kill you and you pointing the finger at her saying "YOU". There would be little chance for her to concider seeking atonement. However, would your (or any) paladin kill a friend that betrayed them? I think not. They would apprehend them and put them to trial. Should the trial fail then she would be exicuted. Trying to kill someone that is supposed to be a friend for little to no reason is not a reason to get atonement. So I would say that her chances of survival is pretty slim.
Out of game- Again, why did this player want you dead. You should sort that out first of all. Of course the DM wants a solution that keeps both players alive. This player is new so he wants to show mercy. However, If I were DM (and I've something like this has happened to me before), I would have the character suffer the consequence of there actions. But if your DM wants to save her then you just have to bite the bullet.
I would suggest you talk to her and come to a comprimise that her character does some things for the paladin to prove her worth.
Hope this helps
For some reason you split up party wise. You went off alone & found yourself in a spot of trouble - that you barely dealt with. And were then bushwacked by someone you'd thought to be an ally....
How does your character know what befell the other party members while he was busy swimming? After all, you fell victem to a trap. Could something terrible have happened to the others? Such as being possessed, mindcontrolled, etc?
Anyways, in character, that'd be my 1st concern. "Why did my comrade just try to kill me??" "Are the others all right?" Once I knew these answers THEN I'd consider punishment options.
As a player I'd suggest that you play using only info as your character would know it.
But as a poster? I think you'd get better answers if you told us all the relevant facts. You've certainly left details out. Wich makes me assume you're only looking for a particular answer.
And if you were a paladin/saint in one of my games? You'd better believe that I, as DM, would hold your privliges over your head. I'd go to great lengths to challenge you.
You have a metagame problem. The monk player is an absolute piece of sheeit. This needs to be fixed out of game. Pray your DM is not an enabler for such behavior "because she's roleplaying". The monk character is finished. DM fiat she should be brought to justice and is out of the campaign. The player is to make a new character and BEHAVE or else she goes bye-bye.
If the DM lets her off scott free, quit. Seriously, for the DM would then prove he cares nothing at all for you.
???
I've got to ask, how do you know any of this? Certainly you read & responded to the same vargue, one-sided, post I did.
Let the judge crucify her... on the Tree of Woe...
Going to have to second this. Ain't no justice like Hyborian justice.
And if you were a paladin/saint in one of my games? You'd better believe that I, as DM, would hold your privliges over your head. I'd go to great lengths to challenge you.
Why? You wouldn't do that to a Paladin of Tyranny with a Half-Fiend template. He's paid the LA for it, why does he, because of his choice of character, need to go through extra hoops when the sociopath gets the same thing but cheaper?
Our party, is a part of a SMALL organization called 'The Watchers' our enemies, are a group called 'The Jesters' The jesters have a ranking hierarchy to their members that follows a deck of cards (spades are rogues, hearts are fighters... etc) and each members is ranked as a deck of cards (two's the lowest, aces high) our organizations are looking for 'The Cards of Fate' We were sent to the mine, looking for a card.
The monk, joined us very recently. Literally one adventure ago She was a prisoner of a harvest devil that I slew to gain my sainthood (theres a lot more to that). According to her, she was a prisoner and a love slave previous to being the devils minion. One of the devil's underlings made a deal that if she brought back one of my personal affects, proving I was slain, she would have her revenge on her former master.
That being said, when the party got to the split in the road, we were bickering for so long that I got fed up and walked down one path (I should also mention I am a hellbred, Fiendish Codex II) The party split and took the other two paths, the monk just stayed behind.
Now, Ive expressed an interest in retiring this paladin, and pick up on a much needed cleric. Simply put, the guy is broken. Clerics are a go to for me, no biggie. However, I had also told people that I wanted to play this paladin for a while. Hell I JUST got my saint powers, and I finally wanted to play with them
So, when I went down my path, the DM (Who worked this in with the monk) Gave me the water trap ON PURPOSE. The monk, seeing that I was not going to die, tried to finish the dirty deal. Her reason, was 'What does it matter, your gonna play a new character anyway?' So what raged me, was that the dm AND this new player both suddenly found the authority to tell ME when IM done playing a character. If this was a problem, it should have been handled out of game, at least told to me, but it wasnt. Shes apparently been LE all along, and the DM gave her a ring of undetectable alignment
The monk is going to run, her original plan was to escape, because she knew that the rest of the party (who would be on my side) would crucify her. Now, the DM has ruled that the party (sans me and her and himself) will vote on what to do with her character.
Now I will respond directly to those who posted (and thanks for the posts btw)
1red13: Ive already told the DM that if this player hasnt been given a 2 wk suspension, Im quitting.
Shinkirou: I did commandeer the party a bit when we went and did the devil adventure, it was made by the DM to be all about my character and his ascension, but as for now Im just a tank. Being hellbred, this is what my character looks like (or how I wanted to look like) There is no 'holier than thou' attitude. however in my roleplaying style, I dont like sitting and waiting (and with an 8 member party, theres a lot of that)
http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/images/c4/c20943.jpg
Humanmind: In game, I hope the above explains a bit more. Out of game, the best explanation I can give is that she a whole new player to D&D and doesnt know how to roleplay very well.
SanguineSphinx: Most of the other players Ive gamed with for years, and they would easily take my side, because they are seeing the same thing I am. From the looks of it, the only person who would be on her side is her boyfriend, who is ALSO entirely new to D&D
CCS: In character, My saint would go back to the intersection, wait for the party and explain to them what happened. The monk said she was running away (at first). as for the saint paladin, our DM is letting all of the players get away with a lot of 'brokedness' and sometimes I feel as though the degree he is holding my privelege is too much. I actually didnt kill the devil, I made a pact with him to have him cease all operations on the material plane for as long as I existed, and then the party druid made an earth elemental explode out of his chest. The DM later revealed that if I killed the devil, I wouldnt become a saint. And now, the party is allowed to try to kill me, and I have to let a spell do what I can do a lot better. fix the problem.
Drackthor: You make an extremely good point about the paladin of tyrany and the half-fiend...
Thanks for the input, hope this helps.
Bobo
By the sounds of that you should be angry with your DM, not the new player. It almost sounds like he was encouraging her to do it. The whole plot of getting revenge on the demon, the water trap, and the ring? Sounds like the DM wanted you dead. It's very poor on his part to try and kill you off without asking if thats what you wanted.
If the monk wants atonement, but also wants to go get some payback on the demon, and is evil, then this is going to end up bad all over. I think your DM should sit down and think about where he wants this campain to head, and if your paladin, or even your new cleric, can have part in it.
Bind her over for trial. Witness that she did this attempted murder.
By the grace of your god, you were saved from this vileness.
Walk on, your faith invigorated, as she is put to whatever law the land deems.
The stuff about the DM in cahoots with the player might well be true, seems like that must have been part of it, and like they or she as player says, you were swapping out characters anyway.
Seems callous to me.
And I'd talk with your DM about communicating more with the players.. not just her as a player.
In my book not cool as DM to plan death of a PC with another player.
Best of luck.
So in our current campaign I am playing a paladin 6 and a Saint from the Book of Exalted Deeds.
We have 3 new players to D&D in our group, one of which is currently playing an elven monk.
We are adventuring in an abandoned dwarven mine, and the party splits. I go off on my own, and fall to a water trap. I managed to just barely survive by breaking the door and having the water run out. The monk shows up, and throws her necklace of fireballs into the hole I created, with the intent of killing me.
Granted she, being new, didnt know what a +14 Ref Fire Resist 10 and Fast heal 3 can do to stop a necklace of fireballs, but she found out when her necklace only did 3 damage to me. She realizes im not even close to dead, and runs. Sessions ends.
I am extremely furious, for obvious reasons, and now apparently the DM is ruling that her monk is going to beg for mercy, and seek an atonement spell. What ticks me off, is that being a paladin and a saint, the DM is holding the privelege above my head. if I kill the monk, I lose EVERYTHING. whereas if she stays alive, I get to enjoy her getting off scott free.
So my question, do I off the bi$%h or do I let her live
Lemme draws yooo a piddure:
LG: Bring her to justice
NG: Try to understand why she did it and correct the behavior.
CG: Beat her senseless, then try to understand why she did it and have a talk.
LN: Bring her to justice with a long walk at swordpoint
N: Beat her senseless and threaten to fling her down the hole
CN: Fling her down the hole and only help her up if she apologizes
LE: Blackmail her into obedience with the threat of prison, and play up your injuries so everyone hates her and agrees with you
NE: Beat her senseless and chuck her in the hole. Leave her there.
CE: Tie her down and make her swallow lit torches and revel in her death as she is burned alive from the inside, try to scream around the massive torch in her throat.
That help?
Wow.
By the sounds of that you should be angry with your DM, not the new player. It almost sounds like he was encouraging her to do it. The whole plot of getting revenge on the demon, the water trap, and the ring? Sounds like the DM wanted you dead. It's very poor on his part to try and kill you off without asking if thats what you wanted.
If the monk wants atonement, but also wants to go get some payback on the demon, and is evil, then this is going to end up bad all over. I think your DM should sit down and think about where he wants this campain to head, and if your paladin, or even your new cleric, can have part in it.
Nahh, this is normal DMing. Place the opportunity for internecene conflict and let the players' personal plotlines develop on how they resolve these conflicts, rewarding behaviors that abandon personal gain (evil) for the collective good (Good) with alignment shifts and new options. Or vice versa.
It sounds like you have a nice RP-rich campaign available to you. Dont' get the DM to nerf it; this sort of thing grows hair on your dice.
That being said, I think the DM resolved the situation by letting the rest of the party decide. They'll hear your side and her side, and he'll be out of the decision since he's obviously biased towards letting her go. That's fair. I say make your argument as compelling as possible, but don't ask the other members to kill her. Take her to the town, turn her over for attempted murder, and leave her there. You cannot adventure with an member who will turn against any of you, and the sooner she learns that, the better.
Edit: Ok, upon further reading, the monk really IS evil. So why can't your Paladin smite her, again?
Nahh, this is normal DMing. Place the opportunity for internecene conflict and let the players' personal plotlines develop on how they resolve these conflicts, rewarding behaviors that abandon personal gain (evil) for the collective good (Good) with alignment shifts and new options. Or vice versa.
It sounds like you have a nice RP-rich campaign available to you. Dont' get the DM to nerf it; this sort of thing grows hair on your dice.
It doesn't matter what roleplaying reasons the DM thinks he has.
If a DM tries to kill a player on purpose, he's a bad DM. Simple as that.
We have a saintly paladin, who's bound a demon to an agreement that basically keeps the demon from doing anything on this plane while the paladin is still alive. We have a LE monk, with a ring of undetectable alignment. The demon convinces the monk to bring him back the paladin's corpse, promising her that it'll get her revenge on those that wronged her, and she buys it. She joins the party with the express intent of killing the paladin, and is just waiting her chance.
Honestly, so far, so good. Everybody's acting in character. I can't see any reason at all why the paladin would be willing to have anything to do with this monk in the future, but everyone's RPing pretty well. The DM has just introduced an interesting little plot hook in the game - a reasonable and realistic result of making a deal like that with the demon (bind a manipulative demon to not be able to do anything until you're dead. The demon will do everything he can to manipulate people into making you dead.)
The monk gets into an argument with the paladin, playing on his known demonic nature, in an attempt to get him angry so he'll do something stupid. He goes off alone in order to get himself back under control, and falls into a trap - which he manages to survive, barely, *but which he does manage to survive*. The monk runs up after him, sees him at a moment of weakness, and throws an utterly ineffectual attack at him, in a painfully botched attempt to do him in. He sees her, identifies that she's trying to kill him (though he doesn't know why) and she beats feet. She knows the habits of paladins, so in a desperate attempt to save her miserable hide from the death she knows is coming swift, she claims that she's going to go get an atonement spell cast on her (by whom? aren't those things a bit on the expensive side? ...but, anyway....) The (saintly) (demonic) paladin sits there, yet again, torn between rage and purity.
Again, I'm seeing all of this in character, and working pretty well. I don't blame the other *player* at all. She was playing her character, who happened to be evil, and interested in killing you for other reasons (and probably duped. It's a lot easier to set things up so that people believe that they should kill for you than it is to actually make it true that they should kill for you.).
----------------
Now, let's consider a few things. The DM didn't kill your character. If he'd wanted to make that water trap kill you, he would have made it kill you. If he'd wanted to put the monk in a position of being able to kill you, he would have given her something other than a *necklace of fireballs* as her alpha strike weapon. He also might have given her some coaching on effective attacks against demonic paladins - clearly, he did not. Honestly, part of me suspects the DM intended exactly this situation - with your character rightfully enraged at hers, but barely singed. You have made the dissonance between your saintliness and your demon rage a fundamental part of your character arc. (Not your DM. You. You were the one who chose to make a hellbred saintly paladin.) He, as a good DM, is putting you in positions where this struggle gets played out. Was there a bit of railroading involved? Well, yes - but many DMs suffer from that - and far worse. Heck, "you go off by yourself in the dungeon - Ooops! a trap." is one of the *classic* D&D railroad techniques. If you must be annoyed about it, be annoyed because it's *hackneyed*.
So, as to your question, my answer would be, "where do you want this character to go?" Do you want him to stay saintly? Have him master his rage somehow, and find a better path, in spite of what all of his infernal instincts are screaming for him to do. Do you want him to finally fall to his baser instincts? Have him strike her down, lose his powers, fly into a fit of rage at the unfairness of the Powers of Good, and go blackguard. Instant recurring villain, and you can go off and play the cleric you were talking about.
In terms of the other player... well, it depends. Consider her for the moment as someone who's been playing a particularly important NPC on behalf of the DM. Now, you and her, as people, ought to sit down and talk a little. It's important to know why she chose to play a character who had, as her primary game goal, killing yours. Knowing that will tell you a lot more about whether she's playing her character well, or is actively out to get you out of game.
Basically, if you can manage to cool off a bit OOC, this could be a chance for some really cool roleplaying in character. If you go into it OOCly angry at your DM and fellow player, it won't be nearly as much fun.
Nahh, this is normal DMing. Place the opportunity for internecene conflict and let the players' personal plotlines develop on how they resolve these conflicts, rewarding behaviors that abandon personal gain (evil) for the collective good (Good) with alignment shifts and new options. Or vice versa.
It sounds like you have a nice RP-rich campaign available to you. Dont' get the DM to nerf it; this sort of thing grows hair on your dice.
Normal DMing is running a campain that ALL the players enjoy. Setting a player up for death and conspiring with another player to do it, while bringing the campain to an area where some ,if not all, of the other players can't follow.
If this is the way you play your campains, you must have a lot of party kills.
It doesn't matter what roleplaying reasons the DM thinks he has.
If a DM tries to kill a player on purpose, he's a bad DM. Simple as that.
There's a million reasons for a DM to try to kill a player.
A DM is not there to be at the service of the players.
The best DMs I know aren't afraid to kill a player when need be. The only issue I see here is that the DM is involved *at all*. Instead, this should be 100% between the players and their characters.
I personally think it was a bad move on the DM's part to pit a new character directly in opposition to you like that, doubly so if it was a new player. It's a difficult way to introduce a new person to the group, and it creates a bias that will most likely take some time to resolve. That said, it could be used as a springboard for some interesting role play going forward, as long as things are handled with care and forethought.
Best thing to do is to talk it out with the group.
There's a million reasons for a DM to try to kill a player.
A DM is not there to be at the service of the players.
The best DMs I know aren't afraid to kill a player when need be. The only issue I see here is that the DM is involved *at all*. Instead, this should be 100% between the players and their characters.
Give me one situation where, without the player telling the DM it's ok, it's fine for the DM to put his character in a situation that is meant to get him killed.
A character putting THEMSELVES in a situation that gets them killed is completely different. I'm saying when the DM puts the character in that position.
Why? You wouldn't do that to a Paladin of Tyranny with a Half-Fiend template. He's paid the LA for it, why does he, because of his choice of character, need to go through extra hoops when the sociopath gets the same thing but cheaper?
LoL... Obviously you don't know me.
Let me assure you, there'd be hoops for the sociopath to jump through. They'd be different from what I'd use to challenge the goodguy with, but they'd be there.
Allow me to bring a little more light into the situation.
Our party, is a part of a SMALL organization called 'The Watchers' our enemies, are a group called 'The Jesters' The jesters have a ranking hierarchy to their members that follows a deck of cards (spades are rogues, hearts are fighters... etc) and each members is ranked as a deck of cards (two's the lowest, aces high) our organizations are looking for 'The Cards of Fate' We were sent to the mine, looking for a card.
The monk, joined us very recently. Literally one adventure ago She was a prisoner of a harvest devil that I slew to gain my sainthood (theres a lot more to that). According to her, she was a prisoner and a love slave previous to being the devils minion. One of the devil's underlings made a deal that if she brought back one of my personal affects, proving I was slain, she would have her revenge on her former master.
That being said, when the party got to the split in the road, we were bickering for so long that I got fed up and walked down one path (I should also mention I am a hellbred, Fiendish Codex II) The party split and took the other two paths, the monk just stayed behind.
Now, Ive expressed an interest in retiring this paladin, and pick up on a much needed cleric. Simply put, the guy is broken. Clerics are a go to for me, no biggie. However, I had also told people that I wanted to play this paladin for a while. Hell I JUST got my saint powers, and I finally wanted to play with them
So, when I went down my path, the DM (Who worked this in with the monk) Gave me the water trap ON PURPOSE. The monk, seeing that I was not going to die, tried to finish the dirty deal. Her reason, was 'What does it matter, your gonna play a new character anyway?' So what raged me, was that the dm AND this new player both suddenly found the authority to tell ME when IM done playing a character. If this was a problem, it should have been handled out of game, at least told to me, but it wasnt. Shes apparently been LE all along, and the DM gave her a ring of undetectable alignment
The monk is going to run, her original plan was to escape, because she knew that the rest of the party (who would be on my side) would crucify her. Now, the DM has ruled that the party (sans me and her and himself) will vote on what to do with her character.
Now I will respond directly to those who posted (and thanks for the posts btw)
1red13: Ive already told the DM that if this player hasnt been given a 2 wk suspension, Im quitting.
Shinkirou: I did commandeer the party a bit when we went and did the devil adventure, it was made by the DM to be all about my character and his ascension, but as for now Im just a tank. Being hellbred, this is what my character looks like (or how I wanted to look like) There is no 'holier than thou' attitude. however in my roleplaying style, I dont like sitting and waiting (and with an 8 member party, theres a lot of that)
http://www.fantasticfiction.co.uk/images/c4/c20943.jpg
Humanmind: In game, I hope the above explains a bit more. Out of game, the best explanation I can give is that she a whole new player to D&D and doesnt know how to roleplay very well.
SanguineSphinx: Most of the other players Ive gamed with for years, and they would easily take my side, because they are seeing the same thing I am. From the looks of it, the only person who would be on her side is her boyfriend, who is ALSO entirely new to D&D
CCS: In character, My saint would go back to the intersection, wait for the party and explain to them what happened. The monk said she was running away (at first). as for the saint paladin, our DM is letting all of the players get away with a lot of 'brokedness' and sometimes I feel as though the degree he is holding my privelege is too much. I actually didnt kill the devil, I made a pact with him to have him cease all operations on the material plane for as long as I existed, and then the party druid made an earth elemental explode out of his chest. The DM later revealed that if I killed the devil, I wouldnt become a saint. And now, the party is allowed to try to kill me, and I have to let a spell do what I can do a lot better. fix the problem.
Drackthor: You make an extremely good point about the paladin of tyrany and the half-fiend...
Thanks for the input, hope this helps.
Bobo
Ah, and now we get "The rest of the story...."
You've failed to see the obvious story paths/pitfalls/consequences of how you've set up your own character. Everything from initial character creation where you chose the class & race, feats & then later prestige class(?) choices, and your in-game actions to date.
You've provided the DM with all manner of things to hurl at you as challenges. Including apparently voicing the intent to change characters (wich could've been misinterpurted)!
So why in the world are you getting all bent out of shape when this stuff comes into effect? This is what you've effectively asked for.
I'm also going to suggest that you're still failing to see the the rather obvious story paths braching out of this incident.
But you bringing up things like the DM/other (new) players being out to get you on some OOC level, wanting to have the new player suspended, trying to turn it into a thing of who's on who's side, etc.
This just makes you sound like an immature player....
Ah, and now we get "The rest of the story...."
You've failed to see the obvious story paths/pitfalls/consequences of how you've set up your own character. Everything from initial character creation where you chose the class & race, feats & then later prestige class(?) choices, and your in-game actions to date.
You've provided the DM with all manner of things to hurl at you as challenges. Including apparently voicing the intent to change characters (wich could've been misinterpurted)!
So why in the world are you getting all bent out of shape when this stuff comes into effect? This is what you've effectively asked for.
I'm also going to suggest that you're still failing to see the the rather obvious story paths braching out of this incident.
But you bringing up things like the DM/other (new) players being out to get you on some OOC level, wanting to have the new player suspended, trying to turn it into a thing of who's on who's side, etc.
This just makes you sound like an immature player....
Unless he player specifically said, "I am going to change characters", or the DM asked him first and he said it ws fine, TRYING TO KILL HIS CHARACTER IS BAD DMING.
Give me one situation where, without the player telling the DM it's ok, it's fine for the DM to put his character in a situation that is meant to get him killed.
A character putting THEMSELVES in a situation that gets them killed is completely different. I'm saying when the DM puts the character in that position.
Then we get into the argument of "what constitutes a DM putting the character in a situation".
My style? I put a situation there that I know the player will jump into. I play on their psychology and present all the tools they need to hang themselves.
However, there are times where it just needs to happen. If you have a character that has now taken the entire campaign off track and is about to TPK everyone but himself through an action, you kill the mofo. No discussion, no handholding, you just drop in a d100 and the only way he lives is if a 100 is rolled.
I've blown up shops, ships, cities....caused crazy Final Destination-style accidents....when a character needs to die to prevent the whole game from being ruined, you kill first, then deal with the consequences.
If their character is being an idiot, they'll die anyway. Someone that stupid is going to get themselves killed by ******* off the King, or someone similiar.
Unless he player specifically said, "I am going to change characters", or the DM asked him first and he said it ws fine, TRYING TO KILL HIS CHARACTER IS BAD DMING.
First, throwing characters into situations where they have a very real chance of dying is not necessarily bad DMing. It may not be DMing that you personally would feel comfortable with, but there are people who enjoy it.
Second, as I noted before, his DM was not tryign to kill him. If his DM had been trying to kill him, he'd be dead. It's really very easy to just make the trap a multipart trap, or up the DC a bit higher or whatever. This was not "trying to kill". This was... something else.