Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Enchanted Trinkets Complete--a hardcover book containing over 500 magic items for your D&D games!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="RealAlHazred" data-source="post: 6748697" data-attributes="member: 25818">Originally posted by Hellcow:I'm not sure I see the conflict. By core canon, The Blood of Vol itself isn't innately evil. The Emerald Claw began its existence as a patriotic organization; it has since been misled and corrupted into an extremist terrorist organization. However, the majority of the agents of the Emerald Claw are still patriots devoted to their nation and their faith. It's simply that they are willing to undertake terrorist actions that are repellent to many other followers of the faith in pursuit of their goals, and more importantly, that they are being misled and used by their leaders, who do not actually share their faith. Erandis and her inner circle tell the EC that their actions are working towards their greater divine purposes, when actually they aren't. This is, as I see it, exactly what Essar's background is about. He realizes that the Emerald Claw is being led by corrupt undead who do not believe in the true goals of the faith, and what he wants to do is to put together a force that can destroy Erandis and the others who are leading the faithful astray. So in other words, he knows the Emerald Claw is evil; he simply believes that it can be redeemed if its evil undead leaders can be removed from power. Personally, I think this is a compelling story and good basis for a campaign arc. Rather than trying to crush that story and say that the EC is irredeemably evil, I'd try to play upon it: place him in conflict with Emerald Claw agents who he served with during the war, who he knows to be devoted Karrnathi patriots, but who are completely, zealously devoted to their undead commanders - Karrns who accuse HIM of being the heretic and the traitor for turning on the Queen of the Dead and her sacred agents. Add an undead officer who can be a good lower-level stand-in for Erandis - the person who is directly leading his former friends to commit terrorist actions. Is he going to kill his friends for following their beliefs? Or will he try to convince his current teammates to defeat these former friends without killing them, and try to prove to them that their leaders are leading them astray? For that matter, given the actions these people are performing in the name of the Blood, can they be redeemed, or have they gone too far?Essentially, I don't see a reason to burst his bubble. Instead, I'd challenge him NOT to burst his bubble: he's old friends doing horrible actions in the service of manipulative leaders - does he think they can truly be redeemed?For me, this ultimately comes down to the idea of a campaign being a collaborative story. Your base vision of the EC is that it's irredeemably evil. However, the player has come to you with a story based around the idea that it can be redeemed. That's the story he wants to experience. As a DM, I'd try to find a way to work with that... to make it a hard thing that puts him in difficult positions - again, fighting former allies who think he is the traitor, and who are doing terrible things in the service of their corrupt masters - but who nonetheless could be redeemed, if the player can find a way to achieve his goals.Originally posted by Hellcow:As a side note, I had a PC in one of my campaigns who had a similar background, though with a slightly different direction. He was a paladin of the Blood of Vol whose warlord father had served with the EC and lost everything when the orders were denounced. As a child, he was smuggled to Lhazaar and raised by Seekers. Erandis saw his potential, and provided him with guidance as well as fanning the flames of his hatred against Kaius for betraying the Blood and his father. His goal wasn't to overthrow the EC, because at the start of the game he believed in Erandis, just like most of the EC; instead, his goal was to raise a force to overthrow Kaius. The catch was that the PLAYER knew that Erandis was evil and that overthrowing Kaius was a terrible idea; he just figured that his character wasn't going to figure that out until after bringing down Kaius. So essentially, his Heroic arc was building up support and allies; his Paragon arc would be an attempt to bring down Kaius and take his place (remember, his father was a Karrn warlord); and the Epic arc would be the "Whoops, that was a terrible idea" attempt to clean up the mess, destroy Erandis, and cleanse the corruption afflicting the Blood of Vol.Originally posted by Hellcow:I'll also add that as a DM, I would be more than happy to create situations where he will have to kill his former allies in the name of the greater good. There's a necrotic resonator that will start an uncontainable zombie outbreak if they set it off, and if he messes around trying to take them alive or talk things out, they may have time to set it off - so what does he do? But I'd emphasize that they have been misled by the corrupt leaders, that they somehow BELIEVE that this serves Karrnath and the Blood when he can see it doesn't - that this simply proves that he must find a way to remove the cancer at the heart to keep more people like this from being corrupted or misled. It's a great way to have Erandis's influence felt long before she is ever encountered in person, by seeing her influence over these one-time patriots. Having to kill the old war buddy to save innocent civilians; having the war buddy curse the "traitorous" PC with a last breath; this is a perfect "ERAAANDISSS!" moment.</blockquote>

Verification