One Annoyed God + One Stuborn Player

[Centaur]

Centaur, I hope you don't feel too put-upon by this thread, but rather consider the points brought up, and perhaps gain something from it.

I'm still curious as to the alignment of the God of Magic. If this is the central church on the continent, I find it difficult to imagine that church spellcasters aren't doing what they can to get to the bottom of the situation. i.e. why are they more concerned with the PCs, rather than the BBEG who violated the sanctity of their holiest site?

An interesting plot may develop from this. Perhaps the church in question is shifting toward an evil alignment. In which case, the PCs (and the sorcerer in particular) may become instrumental in the god's plans of reform.

There's some ideas here that I hadn't thought of......

The main problem is this. It isn't the PC, its the player. This particular player, no matter the campaign or the GM, takes a dim view of any organization or body of law trying to enforce things. In reality, if it was another player doing the same things in character, I wouldn't have a major problem, but it's not.

I'm not sure why, but for some reason, this player allways seems to want to play characters who defy any sort of authority. And he is the only one who does it.

Obviously heavy handed methods are not a good way to deal with it, but I thought that maybe if I made it difficult for him to play this sort of "personality" he might lighten up a bit.

So far, some of the players think the churches actions are justified, and others couldn't care less becuase they are not affected. It's just this one guy.

Honestly, I didn't expect such a heavy reaction from everyone on this issue, I thought imposing a subtle penalty to his spell DCs for a while would be humorous in some ways. He mostly casts spells that are save for 1/2 damage, so it would take a few game sessions for him to figure out anything was amiss.

That said.

The Alignment of the Goddess of Magic is this world is LN She is actualy the Goodess of Magic and the "Earth" as Magic flows directly from the core of the plannet and can even be found stored in Geodes and such.

The viewpoint of the Clergy is that someone with no history with them came in for some healing. They agreed to provide it for a "Donation". While waiting for the cleric to get there to provide said healing, the PCs came in and ambushed the person.

The church has no history with either party, but through their actions, the PCs disrupted the Churches sense of Order. So they set about correcting things as they saw fit.

That said, once raised, they recognized that this person was a threat to the local community and sent the person to live in another kingdom, under pain of retribution if she returned.

 

[Mercule]

The problem is, the god seems to have that attitude of a monotheistic diety, or a diety of a pantheon where all gods are worshiped by all people to some extent or another... IE, that he should in any way expect due respect from everyone, or something... In a standard DnD setting, this doesn't work, because everyone doesn't.

Right. Because a deity in a pantheon would never take an interest in mortal affairs, especially over some petty slight. After all, the word "pantheon" is derived from the ancient Greek religion, and we all know that Zeus, Hera, Artemis, and their ilk were pillars of detachment and refinement.

That said, I still don't think direct involvement of the divine in the mortal world is generally appropriate for D&D. It's just too... messy.

 

[nopantsyet]

I think the wrath of the church he's badmouthing can easily be made sufficient. No need for the God to get involved in such a trifling matter. Even "good" religions can have darker underbellies, whether officially-sanctioned or not. Think inquisitors here.

And let's not forget about extremists. Some very orthodox practicioner of the religion might have a vendetta against anyone who works against the church, seeing it as his duty before the god to destroy all infidels, like the guy who shot Larry Flynt.

And if it's a powerful church, think about the Catholic church in the dark ages and how their law actually superceded any secular law that might have existed in a particular place.

I think it's completely legitimate for the PC to be angry about this and to act it out. I also think it should always be the case that these things don't go unnoticed by someone or some group with power and connections.

 

[Centaur]

And let's not forget about extremists. Some very orthodox practicioner of the religion might have a vendetta against anyone who works against the church, seeing it as his duty before the god to destroy all infidels, like the guy who shot Larry Flynt.

Oh, Oh, Oh...... I think thats the best Idea yet. Someone with no direct tie to the church takes personal vendeta against the Character. Make the PC fear for his life for a bit as this guy stalks him and beats him down before the PC finaly outsmarts him (THis player is good at that) and takes him down.

Then when he confronts the Church about sending this guy after him, they can honestly say, we didn't send him, in fact, he's been somewhat of a nusiance to us for a while with is extremist actions. Thank you for taking care of him for us. Your off the hook.

And the best part is, the PC gets some treasure and XP for his efforts.

Of course, that could be the wrong lesson....

 

[Centaur]

Right. Because a deity in a pantheon would never take an interest in mortal affairs, especially over some petty slight. After all, the word "pantheon" is derived from the ancient Greek religion, and we all know that Zeus, Hera, Artemis, and their ilk were pillars of detachment and refinement.

That said, I still don't think direct involvement of the divine in the mortal world is generally appropriate for D&D. It's just too... messy.

This is the general basis for how I view the actions of Gods, this is after all, our main basis for gods in RPGs. In one way or another, gods are always involved in the afairs of mortals.

This may too minor an issue for the gods to get involved in, but it could serve as a good example to show that the gods WILL and CAN get involved if it suits them.

 

[Wombat]

This is the point where you haul out the old WotC book Primal Order.

In that book, gods do hella smackdown and don't really need to justify matters

That's why I always tell my players, "You CANNOT take on a god. Period. You loose."

 

[Buttercup]

The main problem is this. It isn't the PC, its the player. This particular player, no matter the campaign or the GM, takes a dim view of any organization or body of law trying to enforce things. In reality, if it was another player doing the same things in character, I wouldn't have a major problem, but it's not.

I'm not sure why, but for some reason, this player allways seems to want to play characters who defy any sort of authority. And he is the only one who does it.

In this case, it won't matter what you do in-game. If the problem is the player, then you should talk to the player. Is he a good friend? Is his attitude bothering anyone else sitting at the table?

 

[Zogg]

Eaaaaaa. This situation only necessitates a "we need to talk" DM-player chat if this is his 4th PC that has had 'authority issues'.

Furthermore, what is his class & alignment? Any non-lawful character (even good) could easily have authority issues. I believe you when you say "it's the player, not the PC" but I would say this is only a serious problem if it's chronic and/or he's role-playing his alignment poorly.

In fact, from what I've heard it sounds like he could be playing the perfect chaotic good PC - he wants to do the right thing but is very stubborn (and perhaps barbaric) about his methods.

 

[Shadow64]

My internet connection is funky right now, or i would search myself but I might recommend doing some google-ing for some old medieval laws about what would happen to someone who attacked someone who had claimed sanctuary in a church.

I do like the idea of the random zealot coming after the PC. But i'd make it happen later, much later. Wait till the group stops talking about this incident and wait a month or so after that - then let the zealot come after them. If there were any NPCs in the church they talked to/interacted with that were memorable but "harmless" make it one of them. Who'd suspect that the old man they talked to breifly was some old assassin that had turned over a new leaf, but seeing the holy place desicrated in such a fasion makes him turn to his old ways one last time...

Maybe even have a brand or tattoo on the zealot that may hint he is part of a secret society. That may keep the PC on his toes for a while if he thinks more of these guys may be coming after him.

 

[Particle_Man]

Spiritual twins

Chris, is that you, For a second there, I thought my Stuborn player was writing that response. Because that is exactly his sort of method, given time and resources.

I am not Chris, but I think I know him in spirit.

He plays D&D to be an action hero. He wants to kill the bad guys, pure and simple. He does not want a "real world" issue of having to go through authorities. He likes roleplaying vigilante justice. He will probably be CG (or maybe CN) characters most of the time.

There is nothing wrong with this style of play. It does mean that he will get bored or frustrated if you lead the campaign in a different direction (so political intrigues that require that he cannot immediately go out and kill the bad guy will frustrate him...political mysteries in which he does not know who or where the bad guys are will bore him slightly, but he will perk up when he has bad guys or minions to slay).

If you have the god go after him he will see that as the DM on a power trip, whether you are or not. If you have the church go after him, he will immediately see the church as an enemy to be destroyed/dealt with, now or when he gets the ability to.

The new DMG talks about the style of play called "Kick in the Door". This is Chris. If you can allow him to be the hero, he will be happy. (Think of Rambo, or Arnold in most action movies -- they kill bad guys and never, ever have to worry about consequences or have any doubts that they are doing the right thing).

If your campaign style is fundamentally incompatible with Chris's playing style, then you will have this problem forever. Chris does not play D&D to get into complicated stuff. Chris plays D&D as a release from a complicated world, in which issues are black and white, and in which bad guys can be found and killed, and (rough) justice can be served.

Chris would make a good Holy Liberator (see defenders of the faith, and use the Blackguard template to upgrade to 3.5 on the holy smites/day)

Just my 2 cents.

I am not Chris. But I would be happy to play at his side. Go Chris!