I Need some Big-Time help (Issue: Alignment, DM, PCs)

[Ragmon]

Hello and welcome.
This wont be a short post sorry.
This is in a D&D 3.5.The campaign is in a random world and in a Mountain region with GrayHawk gods.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Group setup. I shall assume that ppl know what I'm writing about (but ask freely if something is unknown for you).
Me: (True Neutral (TN)) Gray Ork / Ranger 10 / Beast Master 1
- Playing him as a strong silent type (i like to let the other players do there things only interrupting when needed.
Favored enemy Dragons (+6)) + a Large Wolf (Animal Companion).

PC1: (Lawful Good (LG)) Human + Draconic + Half-Dragon (silver) / Crusader 6 or 7

PC2: (Neutral good (NG)) Human / Cleric 8 / Radient Servant of Pelor 3 - this guy is playing for the first time, PC1 made his character cause he wanted a healer in the group, PC2 wanted a CN Barbarian. (Hates his Cleric)

PC3: Keeps dieing so he will be mentioned when needed.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The campaign started out nicely I got saved from some barbarians, i swore a "blood oath" to the group meaning I will help em in any way possible.

Brief story is that we need to get help from different parts of the region to battle the armies of Erythnul comming from the west. Barbarians, dwarfs (a few clans here and there), a wizard and a Silver Dragon so far.

The Barbarian city (Frost Giant Citadel Taken over), was under siege by Orks, Goblins, Ogres and some trolls. The Barb king asked us to kill the leaders using the sewers. Ok, wasent a problem. PC1 killed every living thing that came in our path, even the ones that surrendered even some lone goblin who was cowering in the mud, I killed a leader + 1 guard, PC3 killed some leaders too (first one releasing some trolls, and sniped another with his rogue after he died and made a new char, then that char died). PC3 helped the gorup kill the final boss, but then when we got back to the city PC1 asked PC3 why did he help us, he told us the king sent him to help us, but the king said he didn't....so PC1 turned on him for some reason and well cue chase scene (PC1 -> PC3).
They threw PC3 in the dungeon later and he made a new char...then the next day the king got killed by PC3's character and got killed in the process by the guards.
-the point here is that the LG guy killed everything that moved, and attacked PC3 after he helped us, and didn't want to tell us his motives.

After some walking for Barbarianvill we encountered PC3's latest character who died after a Frost Wurm explosion an hour into the session.

Drow encounter (Dwarf fort ruins, the drow were searching for something): PC3 killed the guards but not the guy who hired them
and even trade with the drow.

The grumpy possessed dwarfs: So we found some dwarfs (blood shut eyes and a bit greyish skins) who were grumpy and didn't want to help us. Later the wizard we were looking for told us that there mine was corrupted and there grumpy for a reason, so went back to sanctify the mines.
We got teleported into the grumpy dwarfs pantry (there were no signs that this was the dwarfs place), PC1 braked down the door, dwarfs come and check out the noise, PC1 attacks them on sight, without any words or even asking how the dwarfs looked or had any signs that they were from which clan they were, and about 30+ other dwarfs in the same way, attacking first and not asking anything ever.
Then we encountered female dwarfs they were armed, PC1: Surrender and you will not be harmed". Dwarfs fired but to no avail (PC1 AC 28+ ish), then he kill some more dwarfs. In the basement we found the leader + some heavily armored guards. Now here PC1 chose to stay back. Then the leader ported away (there was a wizard next to him). PC3 now a Half Elf / Sorc/Dragon Disciple talked the guards into surrendering, then PC2 cast Hollow or something sanctifying the mine. Dwarfes now looked normal and were not grumpy anymore.
- in brief: PC1 killed 30+ dwarfes without question and when faced with a real treath he "stood in the tunnel so he can pick off the dwarfes one by one". And the dwarfes turned out to be grumpy and not evil since they surrendered at the end after the PC3 talked then into surrendering, and they turned back to normal in the end).

The small thing that broke everything: So we saved some other dwarfes from a Lich we lead em to the nearest dwarf clan but on the way should be the Silver Dragon we are looking for.
So we set out find an old man in a cottage in the frozen middle of nowhere. We don't know that he is the dragon (but we knew it was the silver dragon it was too obvious), so we talk and head out. On our way we look for signs of the dragon, the next day the same while moving towards the dwarf clan (the dwarfs we saved are still with us).
So I descided ill risk confronting the old man, assuming he is the Silver Dragon.

I tell the group: "Go on without me for a while, ill catch up with you guys, I have something to talk about with the old man. You guys get the dwarfes to clan as soon as possible".
(they were slow with a base land speed of 20 and that is not counting the terrain, I had boot of the winterland and the Wolf with 50ft BMS, and even if they get lost i can easily track em).

DM: So what do YOU guys do. (To the rest of the group)
PC1: I dont know how to respond to this, i dont know how to respond to this accordingly to my alignment.
- these 2 sentences went on for about 30 mins or so, with some given thinking time.
DM: What alignment are you by the way?
Me: TN
DM: You acted spontaneously there, that is a chaotic trait
Me: But I told them in advance and i planed it out in my head.h
DM: But you didn't tell me you tough that the old man was the Silver Dragon.
Me: Well I don't tell you my every thought.

Then it all goes south.

- briefing for the last part: DM and PC1 flip out at me for being spontaneous and playing out my character.

And yes that was about all my involvement Role playing wise during the sessions. I killed one or 2 things during the sessions i could count it one 2 hands.

D&D part end
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Next day:
Then I send the DM a massage:
Me: *brief explanation on the situation what I thought*
Me: You can't see forest from the tree.
DM: Then you can play in the forest alone.

Yea I think he is pissed at me. We havent played since (a week or so now)(we play every other day (2,3,4 times a week)).
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

I need advice.
On PC1 and the DM not giving a damn about his rampage as a LG character.
And on me pissing of the DM.

Its not an option to kick the guy out, or for me to leave the group. Talking about it maybe.

Last words: Yea I take my D&D a bit too seriously. Oh and we a 23+ years of age.

EDIT: There was no alignment change, we work on a 3 point system... if you act in some manner out of your character for instance: Lawful does a noticibly chaotic act gets a point towards chaotic 3 points and he moves into neutral and so on. (sorta like Neverwinter Nights).

 

[billd91]

Since when are neutral characters - hell, characters of ANY alignment - disallowed from doing things spontaneously without facing an alignment change (or some other alignment infringement)? That's really weird.

I only have your point of view on this incident, but it sounds to me like your DM is way out of order on his understanding of alignments. I also wonder if he's showing favoritism toward PC1 on topics other than alignment. Now, this is a snap judgment based on very little info, but I wonder if PC1 is in this campaign like it's a TV show where he's the star rather than part of an ensemble cast. He's dominated PC2 into being a cleric when he doesn't want to be one. The DM seems to be taking alignment cues from him. Does that seem to you to be what's going on? Would input from PC2 give us a useful perspective?

 

[delericho]

Dude, I hate to break it to you, but it sounds to me like you got kicked out of that group. I suggest the following steps in order:

1) Decide whether you actually want back in.

2) If not, go find a new group, or do something else with your time.

3) If you do want back in, speak to your DM (preferably in person, failing that by phone, failing that by email, failing that by text). Apologise for whatever you said that he took offense at (whether that was a sane reaction on his part or not), and then ask to be let back in.

4) Note that because your character has no alignment-based restrictions, it doesn't matter a damn whether the DM changes his alignment or not. So just keep playing.

5) Take the game less seriously in future. Play a bit less, get out a bit more, and so on.

(Incidentally, none of the above should be construed as me siding with your DM. Based on your one-sided account, it certainly sounds like favouritism coupled with a lack of understanding of alignment - signs of bad DMing. But that doesn't really matter. It sounds like you've been kicked out; if you want back in, you're going to have to swallow your pride. Personally, though, I'd be inclined to find a new group.)

 

[Ragmon]

Since when are neutral characters - hell, characters of ANY alignment - disallowed from doing things spontaneously without facing an alignment change (or some other alignment infringement)? That's really weird.

I only have your point of view on this incident, but it sounds to me like your DM is way out of order on his understanding of alignments. I also wonder if he's showing favoritism toward PC1 on topics other than alignment. Now, this is a snap judgment based on very little info, but I wonder if PC1 is in this campaign like it's a TV show where he's the star rather than part of an ensemble cast. He's dominated PC2 into being a cleric when he doesn't want to be one. The DM seems to be taking alignment cues from him. Does that seem to you to be what's going on? Would input from PC2 give us a useful perspective?

Well it wasent an alignment change, we work on a 3 point rule (like: 3 point in chaotic and you move 1 step to towards chaotic, sorta like in Neverwinter Nights).

Yes i feel a some favoritsm on the DM's side too, but I don't want to believe that that is true.
The DM has been DM-ing for more then 8-9 years now, very rarely playing since Me and PC1 arent good at DM-ing.
Oh and PC2 told me the part that PC1 "made" his cleric. But after that faitful night on our way home I talked him into making his own character. He said he will make it before the next session (which never came).
In short PC2 agrees with me on this matter, but he didnt want to say anything since he is new at the table top RPGs.
And yes PC1 is sorta the star cause i let the rest of the group play, I sit back and listen, when prompted to what should we do? I give them the neutralist answer i can think of: "You guys decides...its your call". beasuse i like hearing ppl play somethimes. But PC1 dominates the rest of the group, tells the cleric what to cast and when PC3 tries something PC1 calls him "stupid" (stupid as in he starts a monolog how that is stupid).
And yes you gave me some new views into the situation.

PS: Somewhere I'm the answer to this problem, since im the second longest tabletop playing guy in the group (7 yes or so now).

 

[Sammael]

Hmmm... Subotica (in Serbia)? If so, there is likely a shortage of players, as is the case in most smaller cities in Serbia.

Before I start speculating, I'd like to know how experienced the DM is and whether this is his regular group or not.

 

[Ragmon]

Dude, I hate to break it to you, but it sounds to me like you got kicked out of that group. I suggest the following steps in order:

1) Decide whether you actually want back in.

2) If not, go find a new group, or do something else with your time.

3) If you do want back in, speak to your DM (preferably in person, failing that by phone, failing that by email, failing that by text). Apologise for whatever you said that he took offense at (whether that was a sane reaction on his part or not), and then ask to be let back in.

4) Note that because your character has no alignment-based restrictions, it doesn't matter a damn whether the DM changes his alignment or not. So just keep playing.

5) Take the game less seriously in future. Play a bit less, get out a bit more, and so on.

(Incidentally, none of the above should be construed as me siding with your DM. Based on your one-sided account, it certainly sounds like favouritism coupled with a lack of understanding of alignment - signs of bad DMing. But that doesn't really matter. It sounds like you've been kicked out; if you want back in, you're going to have to swallow your pride. Personally, though, I'd be inclined to find a new group.)

1. Well honestly I really fell neutral about (if) being kicked, cause of PC1 (I dont really like him anyway), and the DM is an old friend of mine.

2. I like in a small damn town (pop. 100k+), not much to do. And there aren't any other groups.... And I would really miss playing.

3. Yea the apology is the start.

4. The alignment didn't chance i forgot to mention...we work on a 3 strikes and you moving 1 step towards that alignment. That and it wouldn't have been a problem for me, the problem was the fact that the DM came after me for nothing (from my view), and ignoring the LG mindless slaughtering.

5. Well the point here is that i did just that, I ignored the above mentioned story for weeks, I didn't say anything about PC1...i was like meh it the DM will eventually see reason on his own.

Please read my Reply its #4.... i give some detail there on the DM. (In short: Hes an old friend and has been DM-ing for 8-9 years now, and usuly hes really good at it).

 

[Ragmon]

Hmmm... Subotica (in Serbia)? If so, there is likely a shortage of players, as is the case in most smaller cities in Serbia.

Before I start speculating, I'd like to know how experienced the DM is and whether this is his regular group or not.

Yes its a small ass town with very few ppl who actually have the time to play Tabletop RPGs.
The DM has been DM-ing 8-9 years now, he usuly is a good DM, he rarely gets to be a PC since the rest of us are bad at DM-ing.
And yes we are the regulars and the only ones....well with the occasional plus player here and there. The DM, PC1, PC3 and me have been playing alone for the past year now... and PC2 joined us a few weeks ago, but he only played 3-4 times in that month.

 

[howandwhy99]

DM: So what do YOU guys do. (To the rest of the group)
PC1: I dont know how to respond to this, i dont know how to respond to this accordingly to my alignment.
- these 2 sentences went on for about 30 mins or so, with some given thinking time.
DM: What alignment are you by the way?
Me: TN
DM: You acted spontaneously there, that is a chaotic trait
Me: But I told them in advance and i planed it out in my head.h
DM: But you didn't tell me you tough that the old man was the Silver Dragon.
Me: Well I don't tell you my every thought.

Then it all goes south.

- briefing for the last part: DM and PC1 flip out at me for being spontaneous and playing out my character.

And yes that was about all my involvement Role playing wise during the sessions. I killed one or 2 things during the sessions i could count it one 2 hands.

D&D part end

Games where the DM is tracking alignment are difficult to run. Requiring players voice their every thought is a difficult way to play a game IMO, so you might want to avoid such a design in the future. Just ask ahead of time for what's expected of the players. (this's unusual enough that you could probably spot all thoughts voiced, if such rules were in a game)

Changing character alignment is not unusual, but it sounds like your DM is almost routinely the overall status throughout the game. It is as if he's tracking the change with every single action taken causing an alignment shift. It isn't charted on a spectrum with incremental shifts, but immediate ones for actions as simple as thinking about the situation and not voicing your conclusions.

When I've seen alignment shift done functionally it means having taken a large number of actions towards the chaotic or another NPC alignment, while taking few non-chaotic actions to draw it back into the current alignment. At some point a chaotic action (think entropic act) is attempted and the DM asks for an optional saving throw (all saving throws are optional for PCs really. Players can always opt to fail). If the save succeeds, the alignment switches. The DM would the say the PC overcame some inner misgivings and performed the action. Moving out of an Alignment-based class like Paladin has more consequences than normal, but moving into an NPC-only alignment means losing your character - how ever temporarily. It can be hard to get the character back to a playable alignment (PC status), but in that way it's like death. One can almost always be brought back.

As to how the session ended and the aftermath you might think about not going back. If you really liked the game and/or the people, then I suggest voicing your misgivings about the last session. It's possible it can be run more equitably and enjoyably for all involved.

 

[Ragmon]

Games where the DM is tracking alignment are difficult to run. Requiring players voice their every thought is a difficult way to play a game IMO, so you might want to avoid such a design in the future. Just ask ahead of time for what's expected of the players. (this's unusual enough that you could probably spot all thoughts voiced, if such rules were in a game)

Changing character alignment is not unusual, but it sounds like your DM is almost routinely the overall status throughout the game. It is as if he's tracking the change with every single action taken causing an alignment shift. It isn't charted on a spectrum with incremental shifts, but immediate ones for actions as simple as thinking about the situation and not voicing your conclusions.

When I've seen alignment shift done functionally it means having taken a large number of actions towards the chaotic or another NPC alignment, while taking few non-chaotic actions to draw it back into the current alignment. At some point a chaotic action (think entropic act) is attempted and the DM asks for an optional saving throw (all saving throws are optional for PCs really. Players can always opt to fail). If the save succeeds, the alignment switches. The DM would the say the PC overcame some inner misgivings and performed the action. Moving out of an Alignment-based class like Paladin has more consequences than normal, but moving into an NPC-only alignment means losing your character - how ever temporarily. It can be hard to get the character back to a playable alignment (PC status), but in that way it's like death. One can almost always be brought back.

As to how the session ended and the aftermath you might think about not going back. If you really liked the game and/or the people, then I suggest voicing your misgivings about the last session. It's possible it can be run more equitably and enjoyably for all involved.

I added this to the thread:
EDIT: There was no alignment change, we work on a 3 point system... if you act in some manner out of your character for instance: Lawful does a noticibly chaotic act gets a point towards chaotic 3 points and he moves into neutral and so on. (sorta like Neverwinter Nights).
And we the players keep track/write down the point onto out sheets.

May I ask for your opinion on PC1's action as a LG character?

 

[howandwhy99]

I added this to the thread:
EDIT: There was no alignment change, we work on a 3 point system... if you act in some manner out of your character for instance: Lawful does a noticibly chaotic act gets a point towards chaotic 3 points and he moves into neutral and so on. (sorta like Neverwinter Nights).
And we the players keep track/write down the point onto out sheets.

May I ask for your opinion on PC1's action as a LG character?

Yeah, a 3 point system isn't quite granular enough for most long term games IME. Also, if you're playing the Alignment track in front of the screen, a.k.a. tracked on your character log, you might also ask about actions that shift the alignment in general.

Rereading the dialogue you posted, it sounds like he's calling any improvised action a chaotic one, which isn't how I've seen this ruled by anyone before. Players pretty much always decide their PC's actions. Chaos in our game means entropy, so it's a complexity dissolving action rather than a creative one. Killing a chaotic creature is a chaotic act, but when done to protect Order it's typically considered an ordered act as the two forces are in conflict. Killing and destroying for the sheer pleasure of killing and destroying would be chaotic. Deciding to talk to an old guy you're not quite sure is a powerful force on one side or the other, with you being in between (TN), is hardly squaring off and attempting to destroy him. If you were, then I'd say the PC was siding with chaos against a lawful silver dragon. Talking to him even though he isn't your alignment? Not quite. You could be trying to convert him after all. Deciding to take an action the rest of the party won't being joining you in? Going it alone in other words? That's pretty much the definition of neutral in my book. That's a point towards center if anything.

Like I said, if you are playing this all in front of the screen, you may want to get a better understanding of upon what measure he is ruling a 1 point shift in alignment. Or a 2 point, or 3, etc.

EDIT: P1 as a LG character may or may not know the old man is a silver dragon. The DM can't really adjudicate upon what he thinks the player knows. He can only judge the actions they attempt. If he leaves, he continues traveling. Hardling non-lawful. Even if he could know the player knew the old man was an ally (L), the DM still couldn't know you were going to attack him. You character is openly (on the PC log) TN. So not an antagonist. Losing a lawful alignment almost always comes up when dealing with chaos creatures like demons or devils. Or when engaging in group infighting. Not arguments mind you, but taking the sword out and attempting to thwack the lawful priest when you're lawful too. It's called losing paladin status. An chaos priest? Thwack away, but if you could turn him away from chaos all the better for your side, no? Think of Star Wars with Vader tempting Luke, only in reverse.