I'm playing a Paladin. Our group's rogue is attempting to sell access to the party's wizard's spellbooks to a known evil woman.
However, this information is out of character information. Though the Paladin knows that the rogue is doing business with a minor villain: the villain is also traveling to the rogue's hometown at the same time we are.
The rogue and the wizard are from the same town. The wizard has taken a leave of absence from the party, as well as the two other paladin's allies who would have helped him stop the villain.
Is there any legitimate way I can have the Paladin prevent this from happening? Is spying unethical?
" Well, I wasn't exactly clear what the price was that the villain was willing to pay for this betrayal. The rogue is trading access to the books to the villain in exchange for information the rogue does not know about herself. The villain was able to convince her because she told the rogue that the wizard had this information but did not tell her."
"The paladin codes applies only to the paladin"
Ergo the actions of your companions doesn't have such a direct impact on you because they don't have to follow your code
Other good options could be
"A paladin preaches by example"
"A paladin should not impose his code on other living creatures but will treasure those who follow it by their own will"
As long as you have those base covered and your paladin doesn't know about the rogues act you can't be held responsible for it.
If pally finds out well... talk to the rogue I.C. and try to convince him not to mingle with the villain
However, this information is out of character information.
What part is OOC, the fact that the female spellcaster is evil, or the fact that the party rogue is doing business with her?
What part is OOC, the fact that the female spellcaster is evil, or the fact that the party rogue is doing business with her?
The fact that the Villain is evil is known. The fact that the rogue is doing business with the minor villain is known. What is not known are the rogue and the villain's plans to copy the party wizard's spellbooks.
The fact that the Villain is evil is known. The fact that the rogue is doing business with the minor villain is known. What is not known are the rogue and the villain's plans to copy the party wizard's spellbooks.
You mentioned earlier that your party is traveling to the rogue's hometown. Are you traveling with the known-to-be evil wizard?
You mentioned earlier that your party is traveling to the rogue's hometown. Are you traveling with the known-to-be evil wizard?
Yes, the rogue hired the party to act as the rogue's bodyguard. I originally went as a fellow guard, but was warned as to the nature of the villain by my holy master. I continue with the party to protect them (including the rogue) from whatever plan the villain may have.
I mean, I dont want a villain getting access to poweful spells!
Point out the risks to the rogue, and let him make the call. If he chooses to go through with the deal, cope, or get involved, but if you get involved, know later that that was your choice rather than a requirement, and the fallout will be entirely your fault.
Yes, the rogue hired the party to act as the rogue's bodyguard. I originally went as a fellow guard, but was warned as to the nature of the villain by my holy master. I continue with the party to protect them (including the rogue) from whatever plan the villain may have.
First, traveling with her might be considered "associating", so I would be careful. You're possibly violating the CoC already. The fact that you're there to protect your friends from her would obviate that, though, in my opinion.
Second, if your character is unaware of what's transpiring, then there's no way you can interfere without metagaming. Sorry.
Third, it's easy to concoct a reason to spy on them. There's nothing unethical about gathering intel. Just say that, as a holy warrior, you're well within your rights to know about any deals made between your companions and evil people.
The fact that the Villain is evil is known. The fact that the rogue is doing business with the minor villain is known..
That should be enough to warn the rogue that nothing good can come from working with that mage. How you decide to do it and act afterwards depends on the character... I'd tell him that you have reasons to consider the mage untrustworthy (hey, detect evil isn't the same as sense motive, but it can sure help) and would rather he did not have any further workings with them. Try to make the rogue paranoid enough to forget about the idea.
I hope this has been helpful.
It really depends on how much your paladin trusts the rogue. "Spying" is such a dirty word for "Healthy vigilance." ;) If your paladin has every reason to trust the rogue, then there wouldn't really be a reason to suspect anything and such an intrusion might be wholly unjustified.
If your paladin and the rogue have sort of that begrudging civility that often happens where the paladin's used to "looking over there" while the rogue plies the less admirable aspects of their trade, it's likely that there's not that trust. And while there is the precedence for tolerance, there's also not the trust that a paladin would often place in their friends, suspicion might be justified. Clearly the paladin would likely have a problem with the rogue consorting with the villain, or trying to abscond with other people's possessions, particularly those of trusted friends.
However, there's also the issue of, if the paladin catches the rogue in this gambit, what might be the effects on the party? I can see the paladin not being keen to work with the rogue after that. Which means one of the personalities is going to prevail and it's not impossible that someone would have to roll up a new character ^^;
If it's just a you don't want the villain learning those, it seems a lot more a sort of metagamey reason.
However, there's also the issue of, if the paladin catches the rogue in this gambit, what might be the effects on the party? I can see the paladin not being keen to work with the rogue after that. Which means one of the personalities is going to prevail and it's not impossible that someone would have to roll up a new character ^^;
Besides wanting stop the villain from gaining access to the spells, without knowing the specifics of the plan, the paladin would want to stop the villain regardless.
Additionally, the paladin would may choose to continue to associate with the rogue because (1) he could potentially reform her and (2) to keep an eye on her and thwart her nefarious plans.
1: What is the minor "Villian" known for? Robbing form the rich and giving to the poor or human sacrifice? Theres a huge difference and both of which can get someone classified as a villian depending on the viewpoint.
2: Paladin hiring for bodyguard work, to assist rogue to do business with a known villian? If the villian reputation is "evil" this becomes problematic for the paladin code, unless you've somehow been decieved, which is not apparently the case.
3: Where the heck is the party Wizard?!?
Wizards (stereotype) are notoriously stingy regarding sharing spells w/o benefitting themselves.
If the Wiz has taken a leave of absence, then the books would go with him.
Did the Wiz go back to his hometown, and thats why you all are going there?
Does the rogue honesty think he can borrow those books for the hours/days it will take to copy spells?
Maybe I'm missing something.
Meta-gaming can be a tough thing to stop. I few issues that may be relevent
1: What is the minor "Villian" known for?
I can't remember her history of evil acts. But I do know that the Paladin's holy master said she was evil.
2: Paladin hiring for bodyguard work, to assist rogue to do business with a known villian?
The paladin is going to stop the villain and to protect the party.
3: Where the heck is the party Wizard?!?
The party Wizard's spellbooks are actually his he inherited from a relative who was super-powerful. It's a whole library of books. I think the rogue and the wizard live together, she was his bodyguard. Additionally the leave of absence is indefinite; it's likely to be more than a few days.
If the player who controlled the wizard is "taking a break", then the DM is in charge of the PC not the other players. The DM should not allow his villain to gain power from a PC who is not present. If the rogue attempts to "sell" these spells to an NPC, the wizard should either obliterate the rogue or find another place to be during the players absence. Once the player is back, the wizard may rejoin the party.
The rogue is metagaming the knowledge that the wizard's player is not present and cannot defend against the rogues actions!
If a DM let my character get screwed over like that, I would quit his game on the spot. I don't care if I was hired to help out the rogue.
Seriously tho, I know your pain, from the rogues pespective tho. I'm the only rogue in the party, and one of the three chaotic out of nine people. Two paladins, One LG dwarf fighter. one LN druid, one LN wizard, on NG cleric, two CG bards, and me. CN erring towards the dark side but constantly being pulled back by my party members.
The paladins constantly get in my way when I tell the DM something, it's gotten to the point that I write notes, not tell her things. I wouldn't stop the rogue, maybe once hearing that the rogue is doing business with the villain, accompany him for safety reasons. That only if you really want to. you don't violate the code if you don't know they're evil...
The rogue is metagaming the knowledge that the wizard's player is not present and cannot defend against the rogues actions!
I somewhat agree with you. I guess I could try pointing that out to the DM. But he's not a reasonable man; I accept this and choose to play anyway.
I can't remember her history of evil acts. But I do know that the Paladin's holy master said she was evil.
Perhaps the "Holy Master" is the evil one who is in hiding and the "villain" is the one who will topple him once she gets the knowledge she seeks.
The party Wizard's spellbooks are actually his he inherited from a relative who was super-powerful. It's a whole library of books. I think the rogue and the wizard live together, she was his bodyguard. Additionally the leave of absence is indefinite; it's likely to be more than a few days.
I have also wondered how/why the Rogue could be selling access to a Wizard's spellbooks. I don't know that this is a good answer but it is an answer.
Maybe the rogue is adding evil but perhaps the subterfuge is being used to conceal a trap. Instead of getting to study "spellbooks" the villain is really be led into a magical trap but the rogue needs to sell her on the betrayal.
As for Rogues and Paladins take a look at the Complete Adventurer and the Shadowbane classes. There is a group of LG types that will snuggle up nice and close to an evil force before plunging a dagger through its cold heart.
Perhaps the "Holy Master" is the evil one who is in hiding and the "villain" is the one who will topple him once she gets the knowledge she seeks.
For reasons too complex to elaborate here, suffice it to say that the odds of this being true are extremely small. However, it is taken into advisement.
I have also wondered how/why the Rogue could be selling access to a Wizard's spellbooks. I don't know that this is a good answer but it is an answer.
Maybe the rogue is adding evil but perhaps the subterfuge is being used to conceal a trap. Instead of getting to study "spellbooks" the villain is really be led into a magical trap but the rogue needs to sell her on the betrayal.
Also, not likely to be true due to OOC information. However, I will take it under advisement. Though, I have previously stated, my OOC information tells me that the rogue is selling access to the spellbooks for information. At least, that's what I know.
Even though your suggestions seem unlikely, they certainly are clever!
talk to the rogue about it
get the rogue to sell the wizards book to the villan for a hefty fee but not to high just below the normal asking price so it seems like a deal.
wizard and rogue makes a deal and does the exchange the paladin jumps out of the darkness, smiting evil and killing the villan.
split the profit 60:40, 60 for the rogue because he arranged everything 40 for you, for doing the dirty work.
just because you have risen up and decided to fight the evil of the world doesn't mean you can't make some cash for it, infact all paladins do when they loot the bodies of the orcs or what ever they killed :p
do it somewhere quiet like an abandoned wherehouse out of the way, no guards
wizard and rogue makes a deal and does the exchange the paladin jumps out of the darkness, smiting evil and killing the villan.
Excellent idea! I may try it. I also plan to try to buy the rogue's loyalty.
Anyway, it's metagame. Your character does not know what the rogue is doing. Let it go. You are not at Fault. It happens.
Should your character actually find out, if the wizard doesn't learn of it at the same time, tell the wizard. Advise the wizard you agree the rogue should be punished just not overboard, i.e. death is not the proper punishment.
That said, the party is over. Disaccociate yourself from the rogue. He cannot be trusted. Bad enough he associated himself with a known evil villain, but he betrayed a party member in the process. He has absolved his worthiness of you protecting him.
Tell the DM it's the player's fault. It has nothing to do with you being a paladin and him being a rogue. It has everything to do with him being a jerk for betraying a party member. You can not trust this character again, giving the player the benefit of the doubt.
Penguintine: "Here is the situation that I can best describe it:
I'm playing a Paladin. Our group's rogue is attempting to sell access to the party's wizard's spellbooks to a known evil woman.
However, this information is out of character information. Though the Paladin knows that the rogue is doing business with a minor villain: the villain is also traveling to the rogue's hometown at the same time we are.
The rogue and the wizard are from the same town. The wizard has taken a leave of absence from the party, as well as the two other paladin's allies who would have helped him stop the villain.
Is there any legitimate way I can have the Paladin prevent this from happening? Is spying unethical? "
Penguintine if you offer this to the rogue the chances are he/she will jump on it and techincally by striking this deal with the rogue there will be mutual loyalty so that shouldn't be a problem, also even if the rogue will do it but is agenst it you can still pay him off with a larger cut of the money, if he asks questions about why you want a smaller cut just say to him
"your helping me destroy evil in the world, thats enough to cover the extra 10% you get" or something like that come up with something that can't be argued with
(personaly i've played a few rogues in my time usualy it comes up right on the spot just make them feel good about taking the cash besides they did put there ass on the line)
how ever 1 flaw in my plan the villian might be suspicious about the change of location so have the rogue either come up with a new populated location yet secluded aka a room at the inn or come up with a decent excuse as to why the location is being moved maybe because its a big deal and doesn't want to be seen by crows because he is aclose friend to the spell book owner (roll sense motive on that, oh he's telling the truth but something isn't quite right) :p hope i helped have fun and remember
roll 1 crit 1 confirm 1 auto kill best in the world :p
(joke its a varient rule can be your best friend and your worst enermy)
That said, the party is over. Disaccociate yourself from the rogue. He cannot be trusted. Bad enough he associated himself with a known evil villain, but he betrayed a party member in the process. He has absolved his worthiness of you protecting him.
Not really. In one of the earlier posts, Penquintine explained that the rogue has been tricked into believing the party mage has betrayed him.
navar re-read the firts post it actully states the paladin knows what the rogue is doing
[i]Penguintine: "Here is the situation that I can best describe it:
I'm playing a Paladin. Our group's rogue is attempting to sell access to the party's wizard's spellbooks to a known evil woman.
However, this information is out of character information. Though the Paladin knows that the rogue is doing business with a minor villain: the villain is also traveling to the rogue's hometown at the same time we are.
Ahem.
Not really. In one of the earlier posts, Penquintine explained that the rogue has been tricked into believing the party mage has betrayed him.
Then it's the DM's fault, which is even worse.
Or the rogue just chose to believe the word of a stranger over a party member, in which case it's back to the rogue player's fault.
(Presuming the wizard player is innocent.)
In any case, the party cohesion is doomed.
I really hate it when this stuff happens.
Then it's the DM's fault, which is even worse.
Or the rogue just chose to believe the word of a stranger over a party member, in which case it's back to the rogue player's fault.
(Presuming the wizard player is innocent.)
In any case, the party cohesion is doomed.
I really hate it when this stuff happens.
If the players are of the right mindset, this could actually make for an intriguing story. Unfortunately, based on the information we've been given, it doesn't seem like this is the case here.
Though the Paladin knows that the rogue is doing business with a minor villain: the villain is also traveling to the rogue's hometown at the same time we are.
narvar open your eyes you noob re-read your own god damn quote
Though the Paladin knows that the rogue is doing business with a minor villain: the villain is also traveling to the rogue's hometown at the same time we are.
All the paladin knows is the rogue deals with the villain. The paladin does not know that the rogue wants to sell the villain the wizard's spells. That's what destroying party cohesion.
On a more serious note, the paladin is obviously suspicious of the rogue and you have a duty obligation to protect the rogue anyway, so spying is highly ethical. You would have the arguments of preserving good, and protecting your client on your side. Although you would have to roleplay your character as either devoted to their job and/or as a busybody. When the opportunity comes along that you happen to see something nefarious occur whilst spying, you can take the proper action of attempting to kill an NPC and hopefully not be punished via DM anger at having successfully destroyed a railroad.
Why is your DM trying to mess up the party dynamic anyway? Regardless of how the situation turns out the rogue, paladin, or wizard will be greatly affected. Such rifts among groups are often worse than TPKs IMHO.
For the future, I suggest buying a rod or wand with Zone of Truth on it and taking part in a lot more of the conversations. :D
All the paladin knows is the rogue deals with the villain. The paladin does not know that the rogue wants to sell the villain the wizard's spells. That's what destroying party cohesion.
you said it youself the paladin knows the rogue is dealing with a villian Ahem (cue Smite Evil)
and if you STILL don't get it these are the steps to take
Option A)
1) paladin confronts the rogue and puts him on the spot saying loyalty or cash (its obviously going to be loyalty)
2) follow through with the plan i sujested Earlier
3) simple D&D terms
Villan = evil = paladin must kill = smite evil = dead villan = paladin gets laid alot by those opressed by villan = paladin saves the day = big parade + made some cash on the side
option B) Kill the Rogue for working with the enermy then kill the enermy neither of them will see it comming but as a side note you would need the rogue to tell you before anything where he is meeting this villan
so remember
villan = bad = evil = cue paladin's fancy entrance ALL PRAISE THE HERO!
Loyalty = truth
truth can't be bought but doesn't mean you can't make some cash trying
y
2) follow through with the plan i sujested Earlier
Only problem is, the plan you suggested earlier is really kinda smudging on the side of chaos for the paladin code. I mean, it's based in deception and working (at least on the surface) with the villain and then betraying that associate. As much as they can go for the law enforcement/sting angle, it doesn't really seem the paladin's strong point and the deception doesn't seem textbook paladin.
Even if the rogue does think that the wizard's betrayed him, he's not justified, particularly he shouldn't be justified in the paladin's eyes, in working with the villain. He may not wish to associate with the wizard, but working with evil, with or without reason, is abhorrent to good.
I suggest you discuss with the player your concerns about the impact his actions will have on player dynamics.
It sounds like the Rogue PLAYER is being a jerk.
Hey, why not invite your DM and the other player here. Let us hear all sides, and we will come up with a solution?
Because if you would act on this OOC knowledge and try and prevent the rogue. It is nothing but metagaming.
But know this. In a metagame sense it don't matter one iota if the rogue gives the wizard access to that spell book.
Because when the time for a confrontation happens. The DM would have picked whatever spells he/she liked for the wizard NPC anyhow to make the encounter as challenging as possible.
This just gives the wizard NPC an ingame reason for knowing the spells it would have known regardless of the rogues dealings.
Hey, why not invite your DM and the other player here. Let us hear all sides, and we will come up with a solution?
Not going to happen due to the personalities involved.
Fight the urge to metagame, with more metagaming.
Because if you would act on this OOC knowledge and try and prevent the rogue. It is nothing but metagaming.
But know this. In a metagame sense it don't matter one iota if the rogue gives the wizard access to that spell book.
Because when the time for a confrontation happens. The DM would have picked whatever spells he/she liked for the wizard NPC anyhow to make the encounter as challenging as possible.
This just gives the wizard NPC an ingame reason for knowing the spells it would have known regardless of the rogues dealings.
Brilliant!
Brilliant!
But did it help?
Did it fight off tha urge to act on OOC information against the rogue and let him/her have his/her little bit of fun trading information for access to the spells?
But did it help?
Did it fight off tha urge to act on OOC information against the rogue and let him/her have his/her little bit of fun trading information for access to the spells?
Yes, actually. It's something that I've considered and am prepared to do. If I really wanted to, but that would just make things unpleasant and alienate our characters. This way the rogue can make her own mistakes.
you said it youself the paladin knows the rogue is dealing with a villian Ahem (cue Smite Evil)
and if you STILL don't get it these are the steps to take
Option A)
1) paladin confronts the rogue and puts him on the spot saying loyalty or cash (its obviously going to be loyalty)
2) follow through with the plan i sujested Earlier
3) simple D&D terms
Villan = evil = paladin must kill = smite evil = dead villan = paladin gets laid alot by those opressed by villan = paladin saves the day = big parade + made some cash on the side
option B) Kill the Rogue for working with the enermy then kill the enermy neither of them will see it comming but as a side note you would need the rogue to tell you before anything where he is meeting this villan
so remember
villan = bad = evil = cue paladin's fancy entrance ALL PRAISE THE HERO!
Loyalty = truth
truth can't be bought but doesn't mean you can't make some cash trying
As soon as the paladin confronts the rogue for dealing with the villain, party cohesion is over immediately because the rogue player will not like the paladin player butting in. That's the point. The party is already over. In the interest of somehow keeping the party together so that there's an actual game, the paladin player does not metagame having the paladin act in character of knowing the rogue is going to sell the wizard's spells. If that is never found out, the rogue gets away with it. If it is found out, the party break up was delayed until then. If the rogue player continues to act like a jerk betraying the party, then the party will break up eventually anyway. It is likely the paladin player, fed up with the rogue player's jerkitude, won't give a darn about metagame anymore and confront the rogue anyway. Maybe it will be a player to player confrontation. Either way, the party is doomed.
Not going to happen due to the personalities involved.
How so? They can't find this MB? You won't tell them about this MB?
Whenever I hear excuses for hearing the other side, I start doubting what's really going on. Let's hear both sides, OK?
How so? They can't find this MB? You won't tell them about this MB?
Whenever I hear excuses for hearing the other side, I start doubting what's really going on. Let's hear both sides, OK?
Still gnawing on that bone, eh Daniel? ;)
You know he's not going to...
Does it seem to anyone else that Paladin plays with others even worse than Frenzied Berserker does, and is only forgiven because it's too pathetic mechanically to be taken seriously?
How so? They can't find this MB? You won't tell them about this MB?
Whenever I hear excuses for hearing the other side, I start doubting what's really going on. Let's hear both sides, OK?
I just mean I don't think any useful conversation can be had by bringing them into the board. They're just not the type to talk things out like this.
Maybe it's selective memory, but it seems to me that well over 50% of all "My party is falling apart because of an problem issue, what do I do?" threads on these boards have direct paladin involvement.
Does it seem to anyone else that Paladin plays with others even worse than Frenzied Berserker does, and is only forgiven because it's too pathetic mechanically to be taken seriously?
This thread isn't about the breakup of the party. This is a RPG problem, not a hack'n'slash problem.
I just mean I don't think any useful conversation can be had by bringing them into the board. They're just not the type to talk things out like this.
In that case, you will have extended them the choice. Try it.
Cuindless; Yeah, I know. Most folks here really don't want a fair and balanced discussion.
Maybe it's selective memory, but it seems to me that well over 50% of all "My party is falling apart because of an problem issue, what do I do?" threads on these boards have direct paladin involvement.
Does it seem to anyone else that Paladin plays with others even worse than Frenzied Berserker does, and is only forgiven because it's too pathetic mechanically to be taken seriously?
And the other half is the rogue's fault. In this case, it's only the rogue's fault. The paladin player is being quite reasonable. It's the rogue who's the jerk.
The fact that the Villain is evil is known. The fact that the rogue is doing business with the minor villain is known. What is not known are the rogue and the villain's plans to copy the party wizard's spellbooks.
To put it simply, your character should not act on OOC information, period. You must act as your Paladin would if you did not know about the spellbook sale. To do otherwise, even on the pretense of other motives, is just cheating and worse you are cheating your fellow player in doing so.
If your Paladin gains information in game without acting upon your OOC knowledge, then you may act accordingly.
Such as the rogue picking up the Wizard's spell book and walking out to meet his buyer right in front of the Paladin. Should he do that then you may act accordingly by securing the Wizard's property and inquiring as to his intent. But otherwise the Paladin should be paying no more attention to the wizard's spellbook or the Rogue's activities then he would normally.
You have no reason to spy on him except for your OOC knowledge.
What you can do, however, is a subtle reaction to the OOC knowledge. Such as what a Paladin, at the least, would do. Which is have a talk with the Rogue and warn her of dealing with Evil people, how they can't be trusted and they shouldn't be supported. how instead she should seek out honest people to trade with, and how she should be careful in her trades not to be supporting their Evil ambitions. She should be wary of aiding the villain or risking being an acomplish to her crimes. Such villains would be eager to exploit someone of her skills and tempt her with false gains and deceit to do crimes and evil acts, and use her as a mere minion. And Evildoers such as the villain have no loyalties and will be quick to betray the rogue. Also mention that you have to be careful of your associations, so ask her nicely that she please keep your Paladin's ethics in consideration while dealing with such peoples.
This might affect the rogue's actions and decisions regarding the OOC information you have, but it won't be seen as an obtrusive attempt to control her Rogue or to cheat with OOC information. You are simply offering advice and guidance well within character, afterall such a speach at least should be expected if she was trading with villainous people.
Her betrayal in this case is rather negliable. The villain is getting some spells cheap, (normally costs about 50gp/spell level) that is about it, and likely could research or buy those spells anyways. As a caster she likely took the spells she was most interested in when she leveled, so there is only a negliable increase to her strength and she can only use the Spellbook to learn spells which are at the level that she could cast.
It requires a full day of study to learn ONE spell from a Spellbook, and then a Spell Craft check made at the end of the day, DC 15 plus spell level, if she fails then she cannot attempt to learn that spell until she gains another rank in Spellcraft. (basically she needs to level before attempting again)
Then, once she learns the spell, she must spend 24 hours writing the spell into her Spellbook. Thus it takes 2 days per spell, minimum, and costs 100gp per page, so the number of spells she can learn is negliable. And as mentioned above, it is all up to the DM, who can easily just have the villain know the spells, but is choosing to use it as a story element.
You have no reason to spy on him except for your OOC knowledge.
I don't think this is strictly true. The paladin knows that the wizard is evil and that the rogue is doing business with her. Gathering intelligence to determine how far this business goes and what possible outcome it could have is well within his purview.
And yeah, it does seem like a lot of interparty conflict involves paladins, but just as often I've seen groups of players who make it their goal to go out of the way to goad on the paladin. There are a lot of paladins out there who are willing to "look over there!" as it were to get things done.
I've got to say, I think after reading this article, I've changed my mind on a lot of interparty conflict. Or at least considered looking at it in a new light.
And yeah, it does seem like a lot of interparty conflict involves paladins, but just as often I've seen groups of players who make it their goal to go out of the way to goad on the paladin. There are a lot of paladins out there who are willing to "look over there!" as it were to get things done.
Pretty good article, except that it's a little biased against the Paladin. I mean, why can't the Rogue also be expected to conform her actions to enable stronger party unity as well?
Pretty good article, except that it's a little biased against the Paladin. I mean, why can't the Rogue also be expected to conform her actions to enable stronger party unity as well?
It's true, but if the rogue's set on not, someone has to step up to the bat. We can only control our own characters
Have you not considered the possibility that a double agent with contacts among both those with and those against the party can make the party stronger in another way? Having someone that can negotiate the grey areas is important. Most paladins can't even see the grey areas.
If that was the intention, it wouldn't be so bad. But she is up to something else...
If you are playing a female paladin then watch the lady like a hawk, bathroom and all, dont give the known villian a moments rest. she will never have a chance to copy down the spellbook that way.
Obviously the rouge is under her enchantments and not betraying the party on their own compulsion.
I don't think this is strictly true. The paladin knows that the wizard is evil and that the rogue is doing business with her. Gathering intelligence to determine how far this business goes and what possible outcome it could have is well within his purview.
True, but the question I give is:
Would you spy on the Rogue or be suspicious of the rogue's activities if you didn't know the OOC information?
Coming up with excuses and justifications for acting on OOC information after the fact is what you would be doing. Hmmm, I need to stop the rogue from selling the book, but I need to know that the rogue is doing this, so I will spy on them and thus "justify" my OOC actions.
The problem that many groups have with Paladins is that they control the party, and restrict what they can or cannot do. If you want the party to work smoothly with little to no interparty conflict, then your Paladin is going to have to Trust the rogue, in doing so the rogue will trust the paladin.
For example, what if the evil wizard steals the spellbook from the rogue? The group's wizard now is missing a spellbook and the rogue has to face the consequences of his actions for betraying the party, as a result the rogue learns that betraying the party or working behind their backs is wrong.
However if you stop the rogue with OOC information, then the rogue only learns that they must work doubly hard to avoid detection. and continues to betray everyone.
The rogue should kill the paladin in his sleep and destroy the body. It's the only way to be sure.
If that was the intention, it wouldn't be so bad. But she is up to something else...
I take it you're not aware of the idea that to make allies on the other side takes more than a Diplomacy or Bluff check.