Is this fair?

[jcfiala]

This reminds me of that bit from Knights of the Dinner table where the girl (name forgotten) takes off in the middle of the session (or skips a game, I forget which) and comes back to discover that her character had stripped naked and fought and tumbled her way through many deadly situations, only to die, having given all her worldly possessions to the rest of the group.

I'd have a stern word with the DM about this, and if didn't bend I'd probably be out of there.

 

[BlackMoria]

The poll begs the question - is this about what the DM and DM fiat allows in regards to characters or is it more properly a question of what should happen to your character when someone is playing that character and makes certain decisions that is not consistent with what you feel your character would do?

In the first instance, DM fiat (supported by the rules) has always been in the game. Helms of Opposite Alignment, Belts of Feminine/Masculinity, etc have been ways that the DM can screw with characters and as such, it is 'fair ball'. In some ways, your situation is not too dissimilar from a Helm of Opposite Alignment issue - the character concept gets nerfed and adjustments to the character have to be made. However, that is not what I think your are getting at.

What I think you are getting at is that your character undertook an action you feel that, had you been the one playing your character, that character would have never undertook.

The danger with having others play your character is this - what is considered fair ball and what is foul?

Had your character (while being played by someone else) done something uncharacteristic but the end result benefited you - is that fair or foul ball? If you say 'fair', then having your character suffer a negative consequence for that same action is likewise 'fair'.

If 'foul', then where do you draw the line on what is acceptable for your character? If the party gets into combat and your character does what you would normally have that character do in a combat situation but your character dies..... fair ball or foul? And on it goes.

Bottom line - unless you are willing to accept any and all possible consequences (rewards or otherwise) of having your character being played by another player, you are better off not having your character present or, if you trust the DM, having the DM handle him like as a NPC for the rest of the session.

For our group, we have a 'Bot' rule. Any character whose player is not present becomes a 'Bot' and follows the rules for that Bot. Bot rules are class depend and follow simple 'behaviors' or actions that are typical for that class. Bots cannot do any actions outside of the rules agreed upon for that class.

So, say that the Wizard player is not present. The Wizard-Bot states the wizard remains in the rear and casts spells in support of the party. That means, the wizard-bot is not going to try scout ahead, not going to disarm a trap, not going to close with the enemy, not going to charge a foe to deliver a touch attack, or is not going to sub in on the front line for whatever reason. The bot does not 'orginate plans' nor does the bot 'volunteer' for whatever activity outside of the rules layed out for the bot. Even if the character's player has done such actions with that character previously and such actions are considered 'in character' for that character.

So, if your group had 'Bot' rules, the situation you outlined would not have happened since the dread necromancer bot cannot 'volunteer' or undertake any action what would allow the character to be 'considered' the sacrifice.

 

[Gold Roger]

I think I'll wait for the whole story till I pass judgement. Meanwhile, I'll silently grin, k?

 

[Ozmar]

First a few questions...do you seem to need to leave in the middle of a session regularly? If so then I could your DMs way of giving you an out of the game. If not then what was this sacrifice made for? Who demanded the sacrifice? If it was a god then would your Dread necro even want to do its bidding? Perhaps it was that your Dread necro was lost in battle and his soul slipped so far away that inorder to reincarnate you they had to give you a new persona. I can think of several reasons why such a thing would happen, lthough without knowing the context in which the events took place I am unable to tell you whether or not it was a reasonable thing for the DM and your group to do.

Oh, no no no... I never leave early. Just this once, because work needed me to get home and work at 9pm. (Been crazy at work lately. This is not normal.)

And I am a bit fuzzy on the details. I've been asking for them, but so far not much. It might even be a joke, but assuming its not, I assume that some kind of outsider required a personal sacrifice to show the party's worthiness or something... or maybe there was some kind of mind control, possession, or cursed artifact. I could readily conceive of circumstances under which my character might do something unexpected (he is, after all, chaotic and slightly mad), but he's a believer in the philosophy of Vol, which rejects the authority of any gods over his life, and he's fervent about seeking a means to extend his life, fearing the ultimate dissolution of death.

I see what you're saying. Under the right circumstances, it would make sense for my character to become "reformed". But absent extreme circumstances, it is highly unlikely. Also, this seems like something that the owning player ought to have some say in, no?

Ozmar the Converted

 

[gizmo33]

IMO anything the DM wants to do in his game is "fair". That doesn't mean it's the right thing to do, and in this case I don't think it is. But I think that's up to your DM to decide. Of course it's up to you to decide what kind of game you want to play in.

I raised an eyebrow when I read that you were playing a "dread necromancer" before being turned into a paladin. Many DMs don't like evil characters (or even "evilish" ones) and many players who like playing evil characters are something towards the "anti-social munchkin" spectrum. I don't have an opinion about you personally, but you might want to consider the possibility that your DM has such a bias, and maybe find out if playing a dread necromancer in his campaign is really a problem. At this point though, it's really a social problem and not a gaming problem. And many gamers I know don't put any skill points in Diplomacy, so good luck.

 

[KingCrab]

Do you have to do a good job of it? What if you immediately fail to be LG and lose your paladinhood? Kill a few babies or something. Then you could probably switch back and start advancing as a dread necromancer again.

 

[Catavarie]

You could always decide to fornicate with the dead whore you find in the alleyway...that would switch you back over pretty fast.

 

[Bagpuss]

I'd hope it was a joke. But if not a few questions...

A) Why the hell would a Dread Necromancer volunteer to sacrifice himself? They aren't particularly well know for being Good aligned. Was your Dread Necromancer Lawful Good?

B) Are you now a L8 Paladin or a Lawful Good L8 Dread Necromancer, L1 Paladin which would be a complete pain since using many of your Dread Necromancer abilities would probably be an alignment violation.

Personally I could go with a change like that if the GM ran it by me first. AoW is an undead heavy campaign so a Dread Necromancer could be (a) have too much of an advantage, being able to control the enemies undead and use them against them, and (b) more likely to work for the enemy so the GM might want you to switch to something more heroic, but at least he could run it by you first. After all if he hasn't had a problem with a Dread Necromancer for the last eight levels why does he have one now?

The personality change is harder for me to follow than the career change personally.

 

[Ozmar]

I'd hope it was a joke. But if not a few questions?

A) Why the hell would a Dread Necromancer volunteer to sacrifice himself? They aren't particularly well know for being Good aligned. Was your Dread Necromancer Lawful Good?

B) Are you now a L8 Paladin or a Lawful Good L8 Dread Necromancer, L1 Paladin which would be a complete pain since using many of your Dread Necromancer abilities would probably be an alignment violation.

Nope, I was a CN Dread Necromancer. I had skeletal dopplegangers as personal guardians and rode a chimera zombie. Half my class abilities and spells would be violations of a paladin's code. I am pretty sure that, if I still retain any Necromantic class levels, I'll be unable to use them, or will lose my paladin's status.

One thing that's curious: I'm a role-player, so if I am, in fact, now LG, I'll try to RP him as a LG character. So he would, presumably, be convinced of the rightness of his new calling, and wouldn't immediately violate his code of honor in order to fall and return to necromancy. Although... if the forced conversion is a thin psychological veneer overlaying his underlying madness, then his previous tendencies might poke through. Over time, he may fall back to his old ways, despite his earnest efforts to walk the straight and narrow. Not really sure how this would play out...

Ozmar the Conflicted

 

[Ranes]

Very funny. I don't believe a word of it. Can't wait for the next installment.