Should this be fixed

[Elf Witch]

Thanks for the input. My DM is also my roommate and she was feeling a little insecure about her decision to let what happen stand. Her one flaw as a DM is that she sometimes bends over backwards to give the players what they want.

Now I know that does not sound like a bad thing. But sometimes she has let players do things that have hurt the game. We have a player who is such a powergamer that he won''t notice that what he wants effects all the other players negatively. When I DM I never say yes to his request without taking time to really think about them.

As for ingame consequences. There have been some. Our lawful good cleric of Heirneous attacked and almost killed his character when he killed the necromancer and he was the one who turned us in to the authorities. My lawful good wizard told my guild what happened and they took a contract out on his life. They dropped it when the wizard was raised. We also got forced into a mission by the crown to rescue hostages as part of getting the dwarf out of jail.

Back when the murder happened we had a bigger group playing it was two years ago. Since then we lost four players they were married couples one set moved and the other split up. At the time the rest of the party was against saying anything to the dwarf and wanted it dropped saying it was a natural mistake.

The player does keep a record of all treasure he gets and does tithe 10 percent to the church of St Cuthbert. The sticky thing about the church of St Cuthbert is that in my DMs game they are fanatics against evil. Their priests often have the attitude kill them all and let St Cuthbert sort it out. In their eyes his killing of the necromancer was an innocent mistake and his intention was good. So they gave him forgiveness.


Part of the issue I think is the player himself. When he DMs his game is full of gray areas and heaven help you if you take the easy way out and kill a prisoner or even an evil NPC if you are in a town.

But as a player he will kill everything in sight if it might be evil. And he won't stop and listen to the rest of us.

Sometimes it can be a PITA.

 

[frankthedm]

But there is some hostility over this and one player feels that it is not fair and the DM should find away to get us more treasure.

that! The party paid the price for having an ignorant zealot with. The Bones were not evil unto themselves and they had non nefarious uses to justify their value. Whether they share the loss or take it out of the zealot's share it up to the party.

Related topic with a different situation.
http://www.enworld.org/forum/genera...-evil-magic-items-he-wants-has-destroyed.html

 

[CAFRedblade]

I just hope the party is keeping a tab that the Dwarf keeps running up.

Sounds like some interesting items to give as treasure. And although the Church seems to have a kill evil on sight, the world you're playing in recognizes that Necromancy isn't inherently evil.. .. so perhaps a chat with a parish priest of St. Cuthbert is in order. Otherwise when next you visit the local charnel house to get a friend raised/preserved to be raised. and they use some necromancy to help keep potential disease down, the dwarf may find himself once again on the wrong side of the law.

It's one thing to view the world as black and white, it's another to act rashly/impulsively upon those views depending on his alignment.
Perhaps it's time for the PC's to reconsider his acts, and allow the law to arrest and jail him.

As someone above mentioned, his alignment may no longer be what is written upon the character sheet. If this keeps up, and he continues his rash acts in the name of the church, perhaps an excommunication or worse is in order until he atones. Even a church with an aggressive stance against evil has to have limits/guidelines, unless the church itself is evil/corrupt.

Hope I didn't ramble too much.

 

[Aeolius]

A DM who enjoys creating original monsters, magics, treasures, and settings should be encouraged, not discouraged.

As for the dwarf, the next time he sneaks off alone for selfish motives replace him with a doppleganger.

 

[haakon1]

It turns out that those skeletons were worth around 30,000 GP the bulk of our reward.

I am annoyed but I am also like well we made our bed so be it. But there is some hostility over this and one player feels that it is not fair and the DM should find away to get us more treasure.

I don't think she should. And to be honest she does not either she feels that we were given a lot of information which we were that these were valuable items and that we would have no problem finding a buyer and that they were not dangerous or evil.

She tried to stop the player from doing it by having him make a wisdom roll but he was determined and she won't tell a player how to play. She also had the rest of us make listen checks and spot checks but we all failed.

So do you think the fair thing would be to find a way to give us more treasure?

I agree with the DM's call on this. With a "wisdom save" to tell him he's being an idiot, there should be no backsies on this.

 

[Celebrim]

So do you think the fair thing would be to find a way to give us more treasure?

No. But the fair thing might be for the party to deduct 30,000 gp from the destructive party members share of the treasure.

And while I'm at it, let me say I really dig the old skool style of your DM.

 

[Rel]

Yeah I think it's pretty cool to roleplay your character right up to the point where you violate Wheaton's Law, which is a line I think this guy crossed.

The thing is that it's probably uncomfortable for the players at the table to have to confront the question of, "Should our PC's boot your PC from the group?" Because they'd not be roleplaying their own PC's if they weren't pondering that question. So any good player should be making an effort to steer clear of that question.

Almost every time I've ever seen somebody throw the, "I'm JUST playing my character!" card, it's been when they were, as a player, being a dick.

 

[Saeviomagy]

The DM really has nothing further to do - she gave you treasure and you destroyed it.

"BUT it was the rogue, HE destroyed it!" I hear you say.

No - you (your character that is) destroyed it by adventuring with a nutcase. You've already paid for his previous mistakes, and now it's happened again.

Why is your character putting up with it? I don't mean to say that you should definately boot him - just that you should consider, in character, what it is that causes your character to stay with this guy. And if the answer is nothing, your character should either move to boot him or leave the party.

 

[pemerton]

I think I have more sympathy for the player of the dwarf PC than most of the other posters here.

If one of the players in the game has made it crystal clear that his PC is resolutely opposed to all necromancy (and even if not all necromancy is metaphysically evil, that is presumably a tenable position - it's not as if toying with the remains of the dead is an act that it would be irrational for a person to have a strong evaluative response to), then by placing such a valuable necromantic treasure the GM seems to me to have set up this situation.

I'm not sure that the GM is therefore obliged to compensate for it. But equally I'm not sure the player of the dwarf deserves punishment (whether out of game or in game, by having his PC ostracised).

 

[Nightson]

This is a good article everyone should read

Giant In the Playground Games


The player who wants the GM to include more treasure is probably pissed off about what the other player did but doesn't want to cause drama by going after the dwarf in game or out of game.

What you need to do is get the players together absent the dwarf's player and talk to them. They may be all for things like this happening, or this may be something bad enough to threaten to kick the dwarf's player out of the group for, it's going to vary from group to group.

Remember, the point is to have fun. If his behavior is negatively affecting everyone's fun then he needs to cut it out.

I've seen plenty of cases of this happening where one character chooses a concept that does not mesh, the GM just doesn't feel confident enough to tell them no, the character clashes, everyone else is unhappy but doesn't feel like they can kick him out of the group.

I have seriously seen this happen twice.

To use a actually very similar example from the game I was playing. We had a paladin in the level three party. The party needed access to magic for a player driven goal. The only source of magic in the town they were in was a lich. All of this is known. The party, reach the majority consensus to go and talk with the lich, the paladin didn't say anything. As soon as the party (again, level 3) reaches the lich's chambers, the paladin pulls out his sword and charges.

And I was floored, while the player had been clear upfront about his hatred for undead, I just didn't think it would manifest in such a suicidal and party harming way. I had the lich simply paralyze him with out of character mercy and the rest of the party thanked the lynch, and scurried off. None of the other players were happy with the paladin, in game and out of game, but it was the party so nothing came of it. And the paladin acted the same way again, and again, and finally on his fourth or so case of doing something likely to get the party killed, he quit after I the DM told him I wasn't going to let him do it.