A Paladin Question

Darklone · Jan 27, 2003

Fiends are not always evil.

Yeah and drows are sometimes good rangers dualwielding two scimitars... (sigh).

Leopold · Jan 27, 2003

Ok folks, So you think i have been pushing my players in one direction or the other. So you think i have been pushing them in a way that i want them to go. So you think i don't listen to my players or hear what they have to say or am just bad, mean, or vile.

And for that I say "Nuts!"

Most of this wouldn't have happened if not the PLAYERS wanted this to happen. I could have merrily gone along with other story arcs that THEY have given me, but the PLAYER(S) wanted this. I involved my NPC's in their lives and will continue to do so, this is the end result.

If the players think I am putting them in a tough situation then, good i am doing my job. I want them to think. I want them to feel that they have some tough choices ahead of them. They are adventurers. They have come very very far, and have fought valiantly and tested both might and right, but now they have the questions of morality and 'goodness' to think about. Something these guys have asked for in every session. All have responded "we want more roleplaying!" so i give that to them. So here you have the quandires ahead. It's only going to get worse when the have to run a kingdom or supply an army. What do you do then? Roll over and let them do what they want or challenge them on issues of the day and issues back in the day.

Now this weekend the paladin has several choices he can make, several paths he can lead down, all will be done by the player. I am the storyteller telling a story the wanted to hear and participate in. From what they all tell me (i speak to them all at least once a week after the game to get a good feel for the session.) they are having fun and enjoying this. They like challenges and this one is new and different and a tad difficult.

If setting up PvP sessions is what happens between PC's then so be it. I alllow them the august freedom to anything they wish, I let their imagination be their boundries. If they want to slaughter each other then so be it. If they want to open a portal to heaven and slay the hosts therein, I will tell them it will be difficult and present other options, but they will do what they will do, who am i to truly stop them and tell them "No!"

They are all full grown adults from 20's to 30's they know consequences, they know right from wrong. They are asking the tough questions and getting the tough answers. I direct them HERE to enworld to get those answers from people who i think have good advice to offer and will give an unbiased outsider perspective.

Detect Evil question:

If the PC in question comes up as Evil, then I will of course tell him such and let him decide the course of action. I will not stop him from pulling the "Smite Evil!" on the other PC. Such is the choices one PC made and now he has to live with it. The end result is what will happen. Both players are very good at what they are about to do and undertake. Both know the consequences of their actions. Both are aware of what may or may not happen. Both are very anxious to do this and see the outcome is good or bad...

Post responding time:

Fiends are not always evil.

Yeah and drows are sometimes good rangers dualwielding two scimitars... (sigh).

exceptions to every rule....That's the beauty of D20. If i want to give my Red Dragon the water template: I can! If my troll now wants to be half-fiendish and be diminuitive: I can! Who says I have to follow anything in the books? Be creative, be imaginative, think outside the box...

To reaper, evilbob, sunfist:

I have to agree with Evilbob. I am a DM running a campaign right now and I personally can't stand the type of DMs who try to kill off the players. Yes, players can die, but that should never be the purpose of DMing. Killing players is not the DMs job in the same way that failing students is not a professor's job. Yes, students can fail, but that's not why the professor is there. It's the same with DMing. You are there to make sure that the players have a great time. That is the sole reason you are there.

I OUGHT to have put a

at the end of that sentence but i didn't. I tell my players that "I am going to kill one of you tonite!!!" and never do. They like that, the think it's a personal challenge and they laugh at me when i say that and they pull something unbelievable out of their hinies when it happens and i had NO idea how to fix it. They like (or at least haven't told me otherwise) the thought and planning i put into their enemies how the enemies WANT to kill or capture some of them. That's how the enemy is right now and NO i am not stacking the dice against them nor cheating to kill them. They can all attest to the complexity and the detail of the enemy. They are more than the horde that "Charge and die!" They lay traps, deadly traps, they lay ambush, they cast spells, I play them to their max and to the hilt and don't hold back any punches. I felt that if I did then I would be cheating them.

The professor deal:

Here's how i teach people. I show them the way to do it, then make them practice it, then do it. If they are wrong I come down harsh they need to understand the error. If they are right i continue onward normally. If they fail, i am strict and some may say cruel but they learn the mistakes and learn not to repeat them. Everyone has their ways to teach and some don't like to learn under me, but in the end the job does get done, the student learns, and the teacher has done his job and the student has done it all on their own merit, and the teacher respects them for that.
I compare it to the Mike Ditka/Bill Cowher line of coaching if anyone has ever seen him coach.

As far "God Complex" "Arrogant DMhood" "Evil B*strd Incarnate" Yes i have a bit of arrogance and pride in my baddies, i have to with these guys! The enemy is determined to win and they have the gumption to do it and the power to. If they weren't proud and stubborn then i wouldn't play them as such. If they were goblins seeing the paladin come at them with a holy flaming sword they would run and scatter. I play the monsters like they ought to be played. In the end i want these guys to have FUN, period. I have told them time and again if they ain't having fun then let's talk and work this out. I am both flexible and wanting to make sure everyone is enjoying it. If they aren't then it's time to quit and rethink and retool and get back to where everyone is having fun.

Anyone have any problems with this thinking or my DM style than email me privately about this, b_d at yahoo dot com. I tried profile checking but it didn't work. If you want it open then take it to www.nutkinland.com and let's talk..

dcollins · Jan 27, 2003

Leopold said:
If they want to slaughter each other then so be it.

This is the biggest warning siren I can imagine coming from a DM regarding his own play style. Have you ever actually seen this happen? If not, allow me to opine, it's usually the single biggest mood-spoiling, campaign-wrecking, hard-feelings all around event that can happen in D&D.

Because of this, it's one of the very few things I've found necessary as a DM to legislate. If PCs are thrown together in the same party with diametrically opposed alignments, personalities, or goals, then at some point the party will definitely fall apart. It doesn't make any sense otherwise -- and when it happens, it's a gigantic bummer. For campaigns I DM, I simply don't allow PCs to be generated with opposite alignments. It's up to the players to communally craft a team with a reason for sticking together, and as a DM trying to foister team spirit and a fun play experience, it's the one thing I find of utmost importance to provide guidance for my players.

If you really think it will be cool to see a TPK inter-party slaughter, then be sure to write back when it happens and tell us your thoughts at that point.

Leopold · Jan 27, 2003

Knowledge Check

1. The champion of a Good deity, who is opposed to evil things, would be one who champions the battle against evil, not just the things that evil npc's do.

Again, i feel that asking "Well did anyone ever remember a neutral fiend before? If so who was he and what did he do?" using knowledge religion isn't going to get that answer. Knowledge (infernal) or even (celestial) might. Diving could be another answer. Religon might give you "yup it's happened" but the who might take some digging.

Think about this. Nowadays we have the 'net. Before that we had to call around to find answers, before that we had to look stuff up in tomes, etc. Some of that rare answers might be more difficult, the Roll of his dice+skill set to different varying DC's (DC 10 gives you X 20 gives you Y, etc.) will give him his answer. That point i'll give you...

2. The Knowledge religion skill is there for the taking. If your paladin didn't take it, that is up to him, but there are three members of a party who should have a tremendous amount of Religious Knowledge: 1. Cleric, 2. Paladin, and 3. Monk (I would posit that order). And, honestly what religious text (claiming the existence of a deity) doesn't drone on about demons and devils (fiendish types).

we don't have a monk. but that's beside the point. Your asking the cleric or the paladin who are both whorshiping gods (cleric-= god of metal) that have NOTHING to do with devils and demons in their pantheonic dogma to know this? That's like asking a fisherman who's lived his life on the sea to all of a sudden design an aircraft carrier "Well you worked on a boat didn't ya???" Sure he may know something but not the whole kit and kabootle, divining for answers can/may help. Also talking to people who specialize in the field would work. Those that traffic in demons and devils might know more. Similarly to one who may broker in celestials might have heard the tale of one as is the rarity of such.

Again, i'll set the DC to varying and be rather high to find info about one unless a specialist is found, then it makes sense.

Kae'Yoss · Jan 27, 2003

Darklone said:
Fiends are not always evil.

Yeah and drows are sometimes good rangers dualwielding two scimitars... (sigh).

Fiends are always evil. Well, not ALWAYS. There may be a single one who's not, or even every millionth fiend isn't evil (that's what always means for D&D, at least in regards to alignment entries of creatures). But most are. In fact, the ones that aren't are so few we can just as well forget them.

It is, on the other hand, not so uncommen for drow to be good. They are listet as "usually NE" rather than "always NE", so the good drow might not be the majority, but it is a possibility (and they even have a good goddess)

It is also not uncommon for drow to be rangers. Those who live in the Night Below often need to scout in the wilderness of the underdark, and those living in the night above very often have their bases in deep woods. Both are regions where a ranger shines!

And dualwielding isn't something special for a drow, either.

Only those drow who worship good human deities, are good themselves, are rangers, and dual-wield scimitars are one of a kind, so you could say about the drow's alignmant "always not cg while being a dual-wielding ranger" (allowing for that single individuum).

Shard O'Glase · Jan 27, 2003

chip079 said:
4) yes it is true that i may have said some things out of game that could send up flags, but if you had a room of people who thought that you were evil you wouldnt play with them? not even a little....yeah rite!!!
5) i also believed that what was said out of game would remain there, i know the people i play with are more than capable of keeping what is known in game seperate from what is known out of game
6) out of game knowledge is precisely that out of game...existing out of the game...it has no purpose in the game...

Things just shouldn't be said out of game IMO. For example in a 2e game out of game we knew the party thief was robbing us blind. In game we caught the thief once. In game we got way to much crap about would we really of figured it out by now, no matter how much evidence came in, how do you know that wasn't the 1st time etc. sure the thief has lmillions of GPs to your 50,000(high level game) but how do you know the thief hasn't been moonlighting it jsut goes on and on. It's just way to big of a hassle to figure out when you have enough in game knowledge to make the decision you already know out of game. So I say to people who say things out of game tough noogies, people can figure it out the 1st time even the tinyest bit of evidence comes floating there way.

Still though in this case it's detect evil, smite evil IMO. Leoplod apparenty does detect evil differently, but in a standard game evil clerics of an evil god radiate the strongest of evils. Your character would liekly be a beacon of evil seen from miles away. And if your not evil, why the heck do you have a demonic template and why the heck do you worship hextor. I could see some evil gods not having evil worshipers, but sorry hextor sell me another one.

Leopold · Jan 27, 2003

dcollins said:
This is the biggest warning siren I can imagine coming from a DM regarding his own play style. Have you ever actually seen this happen? If not, allow me to opine, it's usually the single biggest mood-spoiling, campaign-wrecking, hard-feelings all around event that can happen in D&D.

Because of this, it's one of the very few things I've found necessary as a DM to legislate. If PCs are thrown together in the same party with diametrically opposed alignments, personalities, or goals, then at some point the party will definitely fall apart. It doesn't make any sense otherwise -- and when it happens, it's a gigantic bummer. For campaigns I DM, I simply don't allow PCs to be generated with opposite alignments. It's up to the players to communally craft a team with a reason for sticking together, and as a DM trying to foister team spirit and a fun play experience, it's the one thing I find of utmost importance to provide guidance for my players.

If you really think it will be cool to see a TPK inter-party slaughter, then be sure to write back when it happens and tell us your thoughts at that point.

i have seen it done and it is messy. it DOES destroy a campaign and annoy players. that's why if they so choose to do it they understand the consequences. I have told them such, i have told them what happens. Heck you guys are doing a GREAT job in explaing WHY IT SHOULD NEVER HAPPEN!

Diametrically opposed alignments and philosophies all can be fun to have people roleplay. If someone wants to bring a CE PC into a LG party, i sit down with said person and explain to him what he's about to do. I don't throw him to the wolves. I tell him "Look, what you are about to suggest is suicide, I wouldn't do it, I would rethink your PC concept and come back again with something else." If it will utterly disrupt the party I don't allow it. I have some semblance of control on what comes into the game but if the party wants to full front slaughter each other then I will warn them about what they are about to undertake saying "You understand what you are doing correct?" If they comply they do then have at it. They have already dealt with someone like that (NPC) and came out stronger for it.

This group as a whole is a well knit group. They will defend each other, and rescue each other as they have to come to trust and understand each other. I won't restrict them the option of "Total Interparty Kill" but will make sure they understand what they are about to do and undertake as it DOES lead to all the things you mention.

I have spoke to my players about this and they undestand the consequences of this action, if not they will soon understand it. If one player is seriously getting out of line, i will pull them aside and speak to them. If a player is annoying the group as a whole and I hear about it, i will pull the player aside and speak to them about the problem. If it isn't solved then to save the whole I must lose one, then so be it. The sanctity of the group is more important than the feelings of one, especially if that one is being disruptive and doing so on purpose.

Overall I allow evil PC's and good PC's. I won't restrict their freedom to pursue their dreams and ideals, but if the group is predominatly fiendish and a PC wants to be a paladin, then Houston we got a problem. Meshing of players and their PC's is important and needless and time-wasting violence is dull and unfun for all.

Leopold · Jan 27, 2003

Still though in this case it's detect evil, smite evil IMO.

so far many people are going this route, i can honestly see why.

Leoplod apparenty does detect evil differently, but in a standard game evil clerics of an evil god radiate the strongest of evils.

i concur

Your character would liekly be a beacon of evil seen from miles away. And if your not evil, why the heck do you have a demonic template and why the heck do you worship hextor. I could see some evil gods not having evil worshipers, but sorry hextor sell me another one.

ahh the $50,000 question returns!!!

Cygnus · Jan 27, 2003

Leopold said:
Knowledge Check

Again, i feel that asking "Well did anyone ever remember a neutral fiend before? If so who was he and what did he do?" using knowledge religion isn't going to get that answer. Knowledge (infernal) or even (celestial) might. Diving could be another answer. Religon might give you "yup it's happened" but the who might take some digging.

No, no one has heard of a neutral fiend before—there isn't one. Ever hear of a neutral or evil Angel? No, they would have heard of a Fallen Angel, or perhaps a devil, demon... you pick. Yes, I know the D&D system is slightly different and that they assume that these creatures start out as they are, but the concept is the same. Why can a devil, not be good? Because it is an embodiment of Evil. Why can others be different? Because they run the range of existence, they do not represent the essence of Evil. In the human listing Neutral is listed, it's an average, you will find all sorts of humans. In the 1/2 fiend and fiend listing you will find Always evil (any). I would say that there is a reason for this. If the Alignment descriptor just said "evil (any)," I would have problems with a neutral fiend, but I would let it go.

Those things having been said, I see your point about the Skill check, but I still don't think that it would be too high; however, the skill check system is something that is arbitrary, so go with what you think is appropriate.

Leopold said:
Knowledge Check

Your asking the cleric or the paladin who are both whorshiping gods (cleric-= god of metal) that have NOTHING to do with devils and demons in their pantheonic dogma to know this? That's like asking a fisherman who's lived his life on the sea to all of a sudden design an aircraft carrier "Well you worked on a boat didn't ya???" Sure he may know something but not the whole kit and kabootle, divining for answers can/may help. Also talking to people who specialize in the field would work. Those that traffic in demons and devils might know more. Similarly to one who may broker in celestials might have heard the tale of one as is the rarity of such.

Strawman.
Yes, I agree, a specialist would find the answer much more easily, but your example takes the task to the absurd. Clerics and Paladins have devoted their lives to the fulfillment of their gods. Do they just wake up one morning, decide to follow a particular entity, and then just suddenly know what to do? No, they must prepare, study, and pray; thereby learning their gods' wants, likes, dislikes, and desires. Through all of that study, they would (I should think) learn a little something about (in this case) evil entities; i.e., fiends.

Leopold said:
Knowledge Check

Again, i'll set the DC to varying and be rather high to find info about one unless a specialist is found, then it makes sense.

I still don't think that it should be too high, but...