Very mixed-alignment party (PF) - need help not killing each other!

[WarKitty]

Disclaimer: Before anyone says anything about it, I'd just like to say we didn't have a chance to really talk to each other prior to the first session. Half of us didn't even know the other half, and our DM frowns upon party planning as tending to create the feel that you have to have a perfect party over what people want to play. (Not alignment related, and there is some justification based on past events.)

But anyway, here's the party. We're all at level 3.

Bard/fighter, LG, holywarrior-esque build. My character, strong redemption storyline

Paladin, LG, couldn't make it to the first session due to unforseen
circumstances. New to D&D

Antipaladin, CE, spent most of the first session drunk and at one point asked "wait was I supposed to be doing evil things?" Also new to D&D

Assassin, NE, so far seems to be rather a bully. Spent the first session hiding in the shadows in the corner messing with anyone who went over there. Character is broken (in the what-on-earth-made-you-think-THAT-was-a-valid-race way)

Sorcerer, CN, so far seems to be getting along with my character

So, you see the problem. We have a motley assortment of characters that really don't seem to have much common ground. I am well aware that this could have been prevented by better planning, however that didn't happen and I'd rather not re-roll. Note that this is pathfinder, so there's no absolute ban on paladins adventuring with evil characters - they just need a good reason to do so.

[Z3ro]

Note that this is pathfinder, so there's no absolute ban on paladins adventuring with evil characters - they just need a good reason to do so.

Simple as it might be, there's your answer right there. Why are this assorted group of individuals together? If there's no reason, then of course there'll be problems. As long as you have a common goal, everything should work out, provided the players want it to.

[WarKitty]

Simple as it might be, there's your answer right there. Why are this assorted group of individuals together? If there's no reason, then of course there'll be problems. As long as you have a common goal, everything should work out, provided the players want it to.

We haven't actually been given any sort of goal however. I mean, there's stuff to investigate, but nothing direct. Of course we haven't actually made it out of the tavern either.

Perhaps a better question: Assuming we do make it out onto an actual plot hook, how do we plausibly keep the characters from murdering each other?

[Blisstake]

I don't think a paladin should ever have a reason to travel with an anti-paladin: a soldier literally devoted to causing as much evil as possible. The reverse holds true as well. If the character playing the anti-paladin spent the entire first part drunk, then he's probably not too attached to the character, and wouldn't mind making a new one?

You should probably speak with the DM.

[Z3ro]

We haven't actually been given any sort of goal however. I mean, there's stuff to investigate, but nothing direct. Of course we haven't actually made it out of the tavern either.

Perhaps a better question: Assuming we do make it out onto an actual plot hook, how do we plausibly keep the characters from murdering each other?

The simple question so many D&D parties overlook; why are the characters together? Are they working together? Are they friends? Were they forced to work together by some outside force? If they have no reason to be together, of course there will be problems. If they have a reason to be together, even Belkar realizes that having allies is preferred to going it alone and doesn't murder anyone.

[WarKitty]

DM's not going to do anything unless we actually kill each other - I've already confirmed that. She's...new, and a bit naive I think.

[Callista]

You have an assassin, a vanilla paladin, an antipaladin, and a LG guy with a redemption background in the same party, plus severe Law-Chaos and Good-Evil differences. Yeah... that's not going to work. Those people just would not join up together under any reasonable circumstances.

Time for a big ol' PVP match and remaking new characters. Those characters are utterly incompatible. This time, make the characters together and make sure they have compatible personalities.

Either that, or tweak the backstories (and probably alignments) so that the characters are more compatible. you're early in the campaign; retconning things wouldn't be a big issue at this point. Everybody should write an alternate-history version of your backstories--who your character would be if he hadn't made certain decisions or encountered certain events--that fits with everybody else's personalities better.

I see you're already allowing paladin variants. See if you can talk your DM into allowing non-evil assassins, so that that option is also available for the Assassin player. If you look at the class, you can actually see that the only thing that's incompatible with non-evil characters is the prerequisite to have killed someone because the Assassins' Guild told them to. Remove that (or replace it with a dangerous covert mission of a non-evil kind), and you've got a non-evil Assassin prestige class; no other tweaking necessary.

You guys just have to make characters who'll have remotely the same goals. It won't work otherwise. Not that you can't have good and evil working together; but they have to have common goals or social or family ties, and I'm not seeing any evidence of that.

[WarKitty]

You have an assassin, a vanilla paladin, an antipaladin, and a LG guy with a redemption background in the same party, plus severe Law-Chaos and Good-Evil differences. Yeah... that's not going to work. Those people just would not join up together under any reasonable circumstances.

Time for a big ol' PVP match and remaking new characters. Those characters are utterly incompatible. This time, make the characters together and make sure they have compatible personalities.

Either that, or tweak the backstories (and probably alignments) so that the characters are more compatible. you're early in the campaign; retconning things wouldn't be a big issue at this point. Everybody should write an alternate-history version of your backstories--who your character would be if he hadn't made certain decisions or encountered certain events--that fits with everybody else's personalities better.

I see you're already allowing paladin variants. See if you can talk your DM into allowing non-evil assassins, so that that option is also available for the Assassin player. If you look at the class, you can actually see that the only thing that's incompatible with non-evil characters is the prerequisite to have killed someone because the Assassins' Guild told them to. Remove that (or replace it with a dangerous covert mission of a non-evil kind), and you've got a non-evil Assassin prestige class; no other tweaking necessary.

You guys just have to make characters who'll have remotely the same goals. It won't work otherwise. Not that you can't have good and evil working together; but they have to have common goals or social or family ties, and I'm not seeing any evidence of that.

Antipaladin is not a variant class in pathfinder. I *think* the assassin is actually the ninja class; in any case there's no way you can play the character he was playing as anything other than evil. It's not a prestige class, I just don't have his sheet handy. But he's pulling the whole evil drow assassin thing as his whole character identity.

I'd really, really, really like any option that doesn't involve either direct PvP or forcing someone to reroll. Due to various other limits I rather suspect either of those would end up in the campaign dying due to player attrition. I don't know about the other people, but I usually take a couple days to feel comfortable with a character to where I'm ready to play them. Also the DM is adamantly against joint character creation because she thinks the results feel too much like they're forced into the standard party roles.

[Greenish]

Antipaladin is not a variant class in pathfinder.Well, it's the exact mirror image of the paladin, so in that sense… :smalltongue:

But really, who brings CE/NE characters into a group where people don't know each others yet, and shows up drunk or hides in a corner grieving people?

[WarKitty]

Well, it's the exact mirror image of the paladin, so in that sense… :smalltongue:

But really, who brings CE/NE characters into a group where people don't know each others yet, and shows up drunk or hides in a corner grieving people?

The drunk one wasn't so bad...he's new, he'll get the hang of it. And I might even have a reason to be able to get him to work with me (I see her as an impressionable young woman, she sees me as an easy mark. Works). The assassin...I really don't have an excuse. Then again, I also don't feel bad about leaving him in the tavern.

[Coidzor]

Let nature run its course /Druid


Paladin, LG, couldn't make it to the first session due to unforseen
circumstances. New to D&D

Antipaladin, CE, spent most of the first session drunk and at one point asked "wait was I supposed to be doing evil things?" Also new to D&D

Assassin, NE, so far seems to be rather a bully. Spent the first session hiding in the shadows in the corner messing with anyone who went over there. Character is broken (in the what-on-earth-made-you-think-THAT-was-a-valid-race way)

So, you've got 2 newbies who, rather than being steered away from two classes with high disruption potential written right into the class, have taken the opposites whole hog.

And someone who actively is playing to not... play...

I think your DM needs to re-evaluate his talking to his players before the game skills.

edit: Wait.


I *think* the assassin is actually the ninja class; in any case there's no way you can play the character he was playing as anything other than evil. It's not a prestige class, I just don't have his sheet handy. But he's pulling the whole evil drow assassin thing as his whole character identity.

...Neutral...Evil... Ninja...Assassin...Drow... (http://www.rpg.net/columns/building/building16.phtml)

My god. :smalleek:

Warkitty, get out of there!

[flumphy]

In order for the who paladin/anti-paladin to work, then...yeah, the paladin has to be pretending to not be a paladin for some reason, and the anti-paladin has to likewise be doing the same. Otherwise, that puts them both on iffy grounds as far as their code of conduct. Sure, PF has that clause about teaming up with the opposite alignment when absolutely necessary, but that requires a damned good reason, which your DM hasn't provided yet.

Honestly, if you have PLAYERS who are adamant about being evil and others who are adamant about being good, you have a recipe for disaster anyway. I've been there far too often. Basically, people are wanting two very different types of games, and someone's going to be disappointed no matter what.

[Luckmann]

The only major conflict here that I can see is the Paladin and the Antipaladin. And that is more out of fear that your Antipaladin is a new player, choosing the "Chaotic Evil" alignment, more than anything else.

Also, he's an Antipaladin. I have a really hard time seeing how they would mesh well. But that is a matter of fluffing.

Talk it out with the DM and ask how you're going to reconcile these differences. Maybe he chose the Chaotic Evil alignment without realizing what it means, simply because the Antipaladin has Chaotic Evil as a requirement. Maybe he just wants to play a dark knight or "negative energy" Paladin, in which case the DM may be persuaded to allow a shift of alignment to, perhaps, Lawful Evil or Lawful Neutral. Or, he's a Chaotic Derp who have no idea how to actually roleplay Chaotic Evil without being LOLSORANDUM XDX.

This swings both ways, by the way. The "new to D&D" Lawful Good Paladin could just as well be as much of a Lawful Derp, saying "You evil, because I see you with my Detect Evil! Smite! Slay! You go to prison or die!" nonsense.

If either one of them is a "That Guy", I foresee rage in the near future.

Either way, I think that is the only point that needs to be immediately addressed. All the others are relatively fine. Neutral Evil is basically just "I'm out for myself and nobody else"-grade selfishness, which could mean that he's a mercenary of sorts; either way, looking out for yourself tends to include not being smited by the resident Paladin.

Edit:
Antipaladin is not a variant class in pathfinder. I *think* the assassin is actually the ninja class; in any case there's no way you can play the character he was playing as anything other than evil. It's not a prestige class, I just don't have his sheet handy. But he's pulling the whole evil drow assassin thing as his whole character identity.

1) Yes, it is. Antipaladin is an Alternate Class for Paladin, in the same way Ninjas are an Alternate Class for Rogues and Samurais are a Alternate Class for Cavalier. It's why they have no separate Archetypes of their own (for example).

2) Run. Run as hard as you can and never look back on this group. There's no way a Paladin and a Lawful Good "Holy Warrior" Bard will be able to work with a Drow Ninja who's entire character identity is based around the concept of murdering innocents and being intentionally evil.

Being intentionally evil by itself is a horrible, horrible motivation to begin with.

[WarKitty]

To be fair, the antipaladin actually said mid-session "Wait, I'm evil aren't I? Am I supposed to be doing like evil stuff or something?" So I'm not quite as worried about him. I know this is rare, but he seems quite happy to just be a general jerk and not OMGEVULZDIE! (I still can't believe I suggested that trying to pickpocket my stuff might be an appropriate action to take.)

The ninja now is the one that worries me, in part because I also know that he pulled some fancy stuff with pathfinder races that's only rules-legal because pathfinder doesn't use LA. And because for an experienced player he was going out of his way to avoid interaction rather than letting himself be drawn into the game.

The players thing is less of a "I have to play evil" or "I have to play good" and more of a "I spent quite some time building this and don't want to reroll and try to put something together in a half-hour."

[Luckmann]

By the way, I was wrong when I said that Antipaladin doesn't have any archetypes. It actually got a archetype in Ultimate Combat. It is, however, sorted under "Paladin" archetypes and plainly states "The knight of the sepulcher archetype is available only to the antipaladin alternate class." I am not sure how this is relevant to anything, but I felt that I should mention it since I just noticed.

To be fair, the antipaladin actually said mid-session "Wait, I'm evil aren't I? Am I supposed to be doing like evil stuff or something?" So I'm not quite as worried about him. I know this is rare, but he seems quite happy to just be a general jerk and not OMGEVULZDIE! (I still can't believe I suggested that trying to pickpocket my stuff might be an appropriate action to take.)So.. sounds more like someone that wanted to play the Dark Knight archetype rather than the Antipaladin's Chaotic Evil. Honestly, I have no idea why the Antipaladin is supposed to be Chaotic Evil, rather than Lawful Evil, especially since he supposedly follows a strict code of conduct. Take it up with the DM. Anyone reasonable would allow him to bend the rules enough to fit the player into something more appropriate for the character.


The ninja now is the one that worries me, in part because I also know that he pulled some fancy stuff with pathfinder races that's only rules-legal because pathfinder doesn't use LA. And because for an experienced player he was going out of his way to avoid interaction rather than letting himself be drawn into the game.He.. he didn't pick a Drow Noble, did he? Because if he was allowed to pick that, you should bite your DM as hard as you can. This may not solve any of your problems, but it will be highly satisfying.

[ImperatorK]

If he did pick drow noble then I hope that he got only 2 class levels, because drow noble is a +1 CR race.

[Xanmyral]

Well, from the sounds of it the anti-paladin might work with the party if he continues being a non-stupid evil. The other guy might be a problem, specially because he is experienced so he might be doing this on purpose. Perhaps he will tone it down though, relegating to the Belkar of the group. The last thing to worry about is the paladin, since he/she might stir up trouble with the anti-paladin and sorcerer.

It might work, but would definably be strained. If your DM is allowing this mosh-posh of alignments to be a group, advise her to be more lax on the paladin's code so he doesn't fall for simply not trying to cause trouble.

I would suggest coaxing the anti-paladin towards the jerk/subtle evil path, the regular paladin towards the relaxed good path. The ninja will be more troublesome however. If he doesn't tone it down, or at least doesn't do it in front of the paladin/towards the party, you may need to find a "way" to get him to help the party. You mentioned that your background has a redemption thing right? Perhaps you can try to get the ninja to help the party by out-maneuvering him, or some sort of blackmail. Not the best of options, but I can't think of any others.

[Luckmann]

If he did pick drow noble then I hope that he got only 2 class levels, because drow noble is a +1 CR race.As a player race, this is not explicitly stated (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/monsters-as-pcs#TOC-Drow-Noble). At least not on the SRD.

"Monsters as player characters" are simply listed as requiring DM approval, with no CR/ECL adjustment.

[hamishspence]

So.. sounds more like someone that wanted to play the Dark Knight archetype rather than the Antipaladin's Chaotic Evil. Honestly, I have no idea why the Antipaladin is supposed to be Chaotic Evil, rather than Lawful Evil, especially since he supposedly follows a strict code of conduct. Take it up with the DM. Anyone reasonable would allow him to bend the rules enough to fit the player into something more appropriate for the character.

Yup. Given that paladins are likely to get much more ticked off about "harming or threatening the innocent" than any other kind of evil deed- as long as the antipaladin avoids doing this, the paladin may not have such a problem with him.

Instead, pick other evil deeds to do, preferably while the paladin is occupied- and thus, keep an evil alignment (assuming, that is, that if you do too much good, and no evil, you're in danger of alignment change).

[Luckmann]

Yup. Given that paladins are likely to get much more ticked off about "harming or threatening the innocent" than any other kind of evil deed- as long as the antipaladin avoids doing this, the paladin may not have such a problem with him.

Instead, pick other evil deeds to do, preferably while the paladin is occupied- and thus, keep an evil alignment (assuming, that is, that if you do too much good, and no evil, you're in danger of alignment change).As far as jerks go.. hell, Lawful Good Paladins can be as much jerks as any evil character. :smallbiggrin:

[Badgerish]

If the GM is new, they should be trying something simpler, not such a terrible alignment mish-mash.

option 1) PvP. Wait for the assassin to do something notably evil, then arrest them for it. I doubt they will go willing, so 'subject was killed while resisting arrest'. Try and talk to the anti-paladin into a path of redemption or at least not being overt evil.

option 2) Group re-roll. I wouldn't allow a Paladin or antipaladin character without sitting down with the player and talking through the rules, restrictions, goals and personality of the character. These aren't off-the-shelf classes IMO

The GM has mentioned concerns about group character building, but at least start from a mutually agreed theme like:
Make characters who would be agents of the Western King.
Make characters who would fit in a mostly lawful-natural mercenary group.
Make characters who would heed the call of <deity's name here>.

option 3) Railroad. 99% that this isn't what the GM or players want, but it could work. An over-leveled Mindflayer/Aboleth flaunts the copyright infringement laws, turns up in Pathfinder and mind-blasts the party into submission. They get mind-controlled and given orders to aid their new master and not to kill each other. The PCs go on some missions and try to find a way to free themselves from the control, hopefully learning to work together in the mean time.

[FelixG]

The assassin should be easy to work with.

Ask your GM to drop the name of the BBEG, then hire the assassin to kill em.

Assassins work for money, you give them (or promise to give them) the money and they SHOULD even out fairly well, afterall, if they go against their employer they dont get payed.

Assassins are merchants that deal in death, if the Assassin doesnt like that idea he is doing it wrong :smallwink:

[Drachasor]

As far as jerks go.. hell, Lawful Good Paladins can be as much jerks as any evil character. :smallbiggrin:

Well, that's true I suppose. Far less capability for monstrous behavior though.

To the OP: I don't see any way to reasonably avoid killing each other and remaining in the same party -- the mere fact a paladin and anti-paladin are in the group prove that. The characters in the group have to be redone.

[hamishspence]

Some might, but (with a little secrecy) an evil character and a good character can get along fine if they have enough in common.

When it does get out, the result might be indignation rather than outright rage- something along the lines of:

"When I said we punish those that harm or threaten innocents, I didn't mean we make them eat their own entrails!"

[Drachasor]

Some might, but (with a little secrecy) an evil character and a good character can get along fine if they have enough in common.

When it does get out, the result might be indignation rather than outright rage- something along the lines of:

"When I said we punish those that harm or threaten innocents, I didn't mean we make them eat their own entrails!"

Code of Conduct
A paladin of slaughter must be of chaotic evil alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits a good act. Additionally, a paladin of slaughter's code requires that she disrespect all authority figures who have not proven their physical superiority to her, refuse help to those in need, and sow destruction and death at all opportunities.

Again, a CE Paladin and LG Paladin just can't mix.

[ImperatorK]

As a player race, this is not explicitly stated (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/races/monsters-as-pcs#TOC-Drow-Noble). At least not on the SRD.

"Monsters as player characters" are simply listed as requiring DM approval, with no CR/ECL adjustment.
Drow common is +0 CR.
Drow noble is +1 CR. It's not explicitly stated, but easy enough to deduct. Look at an example of a drow noble Cleric. It's CR is 3 (3 PC class levels - 1 + 1 = 3 CR). That means that drow noble has +1 CR.

[hamishspence]

Code of Conduct
A paladin of slaughter must be of chaotic evil alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits a good act. Additionally, a paladin of slaughter's code requires that she disrespect all authority figures who have not proven their physical superiority to her, refuse help to those in need, and sow destruction and death at all opportunities.

That's a Paladin of Slaughter though, not a Pathfinder Anti-paladin.

What are the rules for antipaladins- and how much slack is the DM willing to cut them?

[FelixG]

Code of Conduct
A paladin of slaughter must be of chaotic evil alignment and loses all class abilities if she ever willingly commits a good act. Additionally, a paladin of slaughter's code requires that she disrespect all authority figures who have not proven their physical superiority to her, refuse help to those in need, and sow destruction and death at all opportunities.

Again, a CE Paladin and LG Paladin just can't mix.

Its an anti paladin from Pathfinder, not a Paladin of slaughter, please learn the difference.

Code of Conduct

An antipaladin must be of chaotic evil alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if he willingly and altruistically commits good acts. This does not mean that an antipaladin cannot take actions someone else might qualify as good, only that such actions must always be in service of his own dark ends. An antipaladin’s code requires that he place his own interests and desires above all else, as well as impose tyranny, take advantage whenever possible, and punish the good and just, provided such actions don’t interfere with his goals.

An antipaladin can perform good acts so long as they further his own ends. And the antipaladin wouldn't punish a paladin if that causes problems with his own goals (you know, like being in the same party and trying to achieve the same goal)

[hamishspence]

Telling people, every time they've been rescued, that they're been done so in the name of (insert archfiend here) and thus, that such archfiend really isn't all that bad- and would appreciate a little thankful worship, might help.

So- they're "spreading the word" about their patron, and gently encouraging others toward it.

[Drachasor]

Its an anti paladin from Pathfinder, not a Paladin of slaughter, please learn the difference.

Code of Conduct

An antipaladin must be of chaotic evil alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if he willingly and altruistically commits good acts. This does not mean that an antipaladin cannot take actions someone else might qualify as good, only that such actions must always be in service of his own dark ends. An antipaladin’s code requires that he place his own interests and desires above all else, as well as impose tyranny, take advantage whenever possible, and punish the good and just, provided such actions don’t interfere with his goals.

An antipaladin can perform good acts so long as they further his own ends. And the antipaladin wouldn't punish a paladin if that causes problems with his own goals (you know, like being in the same party and trying to achieve the same goal)

That's still basically the same essential problem, imho. It's artificial in the extreme to expect such a person and a LG Paladin to be able to coexist in the same party for any length of time. Unless you don't take that text very seriously and allow him to act however he wants because "being in the party benefits him." You'll end up with a guy who does "evil" by having an extremely excuse for why everything he does is for his own darker ends, while never actually being evil.

I mean, wow, what a joke of a code of conduct. He could have the goal "get along with the party for decades" and he doesn't have to do a dang thing. That's just laughable.

Though, there's a much, much bigger problem, the Paladin's Code of Conduct:

Associates: While she may adventure with good or neutral allies, a paladin avoids working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends her moral code. Under exceptional circumstances, a paladin can ally with evil associates, but only to defeat what she believes to be a greater evil. A paladin should seek an atonement spell periodically during such an unusual alliance, and should end the alliance immediately should she feel it is doing more harm than good. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

So unless there's essentially a constant state of emergency, he can't keep adventuring with a CE Paladin.

[Luckmann]

Drow common is +0 CR.
Drow noble is +1 CR. It's not explicitly stated, but easy enough to deduct. Look at an example of a drow noble Cleric. It's CR is 3 (3 PC class levels - 1 + 1 = 3 CR). That means that drow noble has +1 CR.
Uh, maybe so, but you would still be houseruling. And when I look at the raw stats difference between a regular Drow Player Character and a Drow Noble Player Character, that's *at least* ECL +2 in my mind. But that would still be a judgement call and a houserule.

[Larpus]

As others have mentioned, the biggest issues seem to be the Paladin to party hard with his nemesis per say and 2 newbies with Evil-alignment (one of them thinking it to be "I kick puppies for fun" kind of evil).

So those 3 need to be addressed.

First is to make the evil guys realize exactly what an evil alignment mean, which can either be the "I burn orphanages because I find it hilarious to say 'haha, you have no parents and you are on fire'", but this only truly works if played for laughs or on a evil-centric/heavy campaign to the more classy "I'll do whatever is necessary to achieve my goals, even if that means burying alive an entire town of kitten-folks".

And then they have to develop their persona and goals from there, likewise it might be good and worthwhile to teach the Paladin that LG =/= Lawful Stupid =/= Goody Two Shoes; so there's no need for him to be a prick with something up his being behindy about anything slightly evil anyone can do; possibly his interaction with the Anti-Paladin is that said anti is actually a fallen Paladin and they're sort of competing to see whose believes and methods are truly superior or something to that extent, still, it'll be hard, so maybe one of them going Cleric, Inquisitor, Cavalier, Barbarian, etc would be overall better just so they're not tied down due to the code of conduct.

And mostly make them all (DM included) realize that it's a group-based game, so as a-hole as your character may be, cut everyone else some slack and be a bro to the party, it's actually even beneficial for you, since chances are they'll stick out on your defense when a very clever plan of yours goes downhill and you now have an entire kingdom after your head.

Likewise, the plot to the campaign must offer something to everyone, a Wizard will be bored to his skull in a religion-heavy campaign, a Trap-based Rogue will be completely useless on a campaign with no traps, a Fighter will curse the heavens on the campaign of the "Flying awesomeness of being able to fly" and so on; so whatever the DM thinks, she needs some involvement for this to work, even if she decides to leave most of it on the hands of the players, she still needs to be vocal and pitch ideas to just make everything work (but yeah, I still think that no talky between party members is a bad idea).

[ImperatorK]

Uh, maybe so, but you would still be houseruling. And when I look at the raw stats difference between a regular Drow Player Character and a Drow Noble Player Character, that's *at least* ECL +2 in my mind. But that would still be a judgement call and a houserule.
There's no houseruling on my part. The CR adjustment is right there, in the stats.

[FMArthur]

Mature play can solve alignment clashes before they begin. "Evil" shouldn't mean that a person performs evil deeds for the sole reason of "it's evil". Ideally an Evil character should only rarely even know they are Evil.

However... Antipaladins and especially Paladins of Slaughter throw a wrench into this by enforcing the stupidest, most immature conception of Evil to play. Antipaladins can get away with contriving to justify heroism and cooperation in various ways at least. Simply having "acquire power and gain a reputation as a heroic figure to become a brutal tyrant later" or something similar involving an evil deity is an easy path to making an Antipaladin fit an adventuring party.


Uh, maybe so, but you would still be houseruling. And when I look at the raw stats difference between a regular Drow Player Character and a Drow Noble Player Character, that's *at least* ECL +2 in my mind. But that would still be a judgement call and a houserule.

Playing monster races at all effectively requires houseruling. The DM is required to work out something with the player on a case-by-case basis; if an unbalanced monster race is allowed to be used in a PF game, the only person at fault is the DM because it's not even in play by default.

[hamishspence]

However... Antipaladins and especially Paladins of Slaughter throw a wrench into this by enforcing the stupidest, most immature conception of Evil to play. Antipaladins can get away with contriving to justify heroism and cooperation in various ways at least. Simply having "acquire power and gain a reputation as a heroic figure to become a brutal tyrant later" or something similar involving an evil deity is an easy path to making an Antipaladin fit an adventuring party.

I like the idea of parleying one's reputation for helping others, into a way of opening those same others, to corruption.

Being a "Bad Samaritan" in short.

Keeping one's alignment secret from the paladin might be necessary though.

[Luckmann]

There's no houseruling on my part. The CR adjustment is right there, in the stats.

No, it's not.

You're trying to reinterpret the rules based on the CR of creatures. Monsters as Player Characters does not have CR, nor ECL adjustments. You're putting something into the rules that isn't there, ergo houseruling.

I agree with the houseruling, but it's still a houserule.


[...]
Playing monster races at all effectively requires houseruling. The DM is required to work out something with the player on a case-by-case basis; if an unbalanced monster race is allowed to be used in a PF game, the only person at fault is the DM because it's not even in play by default.I entirely agree with that. It even says, plain as day, that Monsters as Player Characters requires approval by the DM. It's nothing but plain madness to allow something as a Drow Noble to even be played, especially without any kind of ECL (and frankly, putting it at ECL +1 for all those bonuses is not near enough).

But it doesn't change the fact that you *are* houseruling it. There's nothing in the rules as far as CR goes for Drow Nobles as Player Characters, nor anything on ECL adjustments. Which was my only point.

[Analytica]

Ask the DM to tie the characters together post-hoc. Maybe they all happen to share allegiance to an authority which uses both evil and good servants towards mostly good ends (think Roman Empire, maybe), and which has asked them to perform some quest together for hidden reasons. Perhaps it turns out they are actually relatives or childhood friends, or tied together by bonds of love despite circumstances. :smallbiggrin:

[ImperatorK]

No, it's not.

You're trying to reinterpret the rules based on the CR of creatures. Monsters as Player Characters does not have CR, nor ECL adjustments. You're putting something into the rules that isn't there, ergo houseruling.

Huh? Did they change the rules? Because last time I checked CR was considered the new PF version of LA.


Using a monster as a character can be very rewarding, but weighing such a character against others is challenging. Monsters are not designed with the rules for players in mind, and as such can be very unbalancing if not handled carefully.

There are a number of monsters that do not possess racial Hit Dice. Such creatures are the best options for player characters, but a few of them are so powerful that they count as having 1 class level, even without a racial Hit Die. Such characters should only be allowed in a group that is 2nd-level or higher.

For monsters with racial Hit Dice, the best way to allow monster PCs is to pick a CR and allow all of the players to make characters using monsters of that CR. Treat the monster's CR as its total class levels and allow the characters to multiclass into the core classes. Do not advance such monsters by adding Hit Dice. Monster PCs should only advance through classes.

If you are including a single monster character in a group of standard characters, make sure the group is of a level that is at least as high as the monster's CR. Treat the monster's CR as class levels when determining the monster PC's overall levels. For example, in a group of 6th-level characters, a minotaur (CR 4) would possess 2 levels of a core class, such as barbarian.
Deducting from the stats a drow noble is +1 CR, thus counting as a second level character in a team of standard races.

[Luckmann]

Huh? Did they change the rules? Because last time I checked CR was considered the new PF version of LA.It is. Check Templates for examples.

Deducting from the stats a drow noble is +1 CR, thus counting as a second level character in a team of standard races.See, if it was actually in the rules, you wouldn't have to deduct anything.

Maybe it is in the rules and the SRD is just bad at listing all the relevant adjustments (including CR) for the Monster Races as Player Characters, but I only have the SRD to go buy.

Edit: Well, actually (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/bestiary/monster-listings/humanoids/drow-1/drow-noble)...

Drow nobles are defined by their class levels—they do not possess racial Hit Dice. A drow noble's challenge rating is equal to her class level. Drow nobles possess all of the racial traits listed above for drow characters, plus the following.So much for your deduction based on creature stats. :smallamused:

[ImperatorK]

It is. Check Templates for examples.
See, if it was actually in the rules, you wouldn't have to deduct anything.
I know, I was being sarcastic.


Maybe it is in the rules and the SRD is just bad at listing all the relevant adjustments (including CR) for the Monster Races as Player Characters, but I only have the SRD to go buy.
Well, I don't know why they don't list the CR adjustments. Maybe they're trying to discourage playing monsters? Either way it's not a problem to me.


So much for your deduction based on creature stats.
Well, yes. You can see that in the monster stats. What's your point? :smallconfused:

[Luckmann]

I know, I was being sarcastic.More like willfully obtuse. :smallsigh:

Well, I don't know why they don't list the CR adjustments. Maybe they're trying to discourage playing monsters? Either way it's not a problem to me.Well obviously it was a big enough problem for you to sell of your houseruling as a rule. If you actually had an example of the rule, I'm sure you would've mentioned it by now. :smallannoyed:

Well, yes. You can see that in the monster stats. What's your point? :smallconfused:The same point I have been making all along; By RAW, Drow Nobles have no CR/ECL adjustment. But you already knew that.

[ImperatorK]

{Scrubbed}

[Vandicus]

Really the only way for this to work is if the DM provides a really really good reason for the players to work together, such as the constant threat of death/world annhilation, or the evil players hide their evil nature. I've run a game with this much alignment conflict twice. The first time it required heavy (in-game) financial incentive, being the most effective way to achieve their goals, and the threat of both death and the destruction of the universe to get them to work together. I was lucky in that the first group didn't have any paladins, but my second group(which is actually in an ongoing campaign) has two LG paladins and 2 evil party members who are hiding their evilness. My expectation is that once the paladins figure out what's going on, we'll have a bout of PvP followed by rerolls.

Personally, I'd talk to the CE paladin player about his concept, and inform him he doesn't need to be evil or chaotic to be a jerk. If he can at least shift to CN(assuming this is allowed), the group suddenly becomes a lot less dysfunctional. As for the drow, either ignore him(as there's no reason to work with him) as long as he's playing an antisocial(and I do mean the disorder :smallwink: ) character(don't even invite his character into the party, why should you?), or kill him when gets out of line. Optimizing is all well and good, but optimizing a character to be a non-participant and bully other party members is a big screw you to the GM and the party.

[WarKitty]

Yeah you guessed it - the guy's trying to get away with Drow Noble as a PC race. It was a last-minute character, so I suspect that he told the DM he's playing a drow.

In-game...yeah I'm settling on ignoring the assassin. I may talk to the antipaladin and ask if he'd want to switch over to a fighter or something. Given the nature of the world, it may end up being "well you're going this way and I'm going this way and I'd rather have you where I could see you," at least for the first bit.

[ImperatorK]

Yeah you guessed it - the guy's trying to get away with Drow Noble as a PC race. It was a last-minute character, so I suspect that he told the DM he's playing a drow.
Nothing wrong with that if the DM allowed and he's got that +1 CR adjustment.

[WarKitty]

Nothing wrong with that if the DM allowed and he's got that +1 CR adjustment.

No CR adjustment. And honestly, with his SLA's I still don't think he'd be balanced in a level 3 party - he's got access to too many good spells as SLA's that aren't available at level 3. CR as LA being explicitly a guideline in pathfinder.

[ImperatorK]

No CR adjustment.
:smallsigh: Yes, it does. Pathfinder does not list CR adjustments for playable races, but THEY HAVE THEM. Drow noble has +1. Check the stats. :smallannoyed:

[WarKitty]

:smallsigh: Yes, it does. Pathfinder does not list CR adjustments for playable races, but THEY HAVE THEM. Drow noble has +1. Check the stats. :smallannoyed:

I meant "his character sheet doesn't have a CR adjustment."

[ImperatorK]

Then tell the DM.

[WarKitty]

Then tell the DM.

I'll handle that part. I was making a point about the player and what he's trying to bring to the table.

And honestly I wouldn't be happy with any character that had dispel magic or deeper darkness at level 3 - they're abilities we basically have no counter for at this level.

[ImperatorK]

But you know where to find that +1 CR for drow noble, right?

[WarKitty]

But you know where to find that +1 CR for drow noble, right?

I am quite well aware of how to find it. Pathfinder itself explicitly states that the CR rules for PC's are guidelines and should be individually evaluated - the "base" rules don't allow for monster PC's. Any rule in pathfinder that allows monstrous PC's in is a house rule, or at least a custom interpretation of a variant rule.

[ImperatorK]

No matter how you think of them, if they're in the game, they're rules. And as it is with WBL or CR system in general, most DMs will use them as rules, even if they're guidelines. It's easier that way.
So tell me where that +1 CR is (to find)?

[WarKitty]

No matter how you think of them, if they're in the game, they're rules. And as it is with WBL or CR system in general, most DMs will use them as rules, even if they're guidelines. It's easier that way.
So tell me where that +1 CR is (to find)?

I don't see how that's related to the purpose of this thread. If you want to talk about CR and LA in pathfinder that's a separate topic. I'd prefer to keep this one dealing with alignments, since that was its purpose.

[ImperatorK]

{Scrubbed}

[beyond reality]

Just make sure not to let the paladin and anti-paladin touch. The explosion would kill everything for miles.

More seriously it sounds like you have the makings of a very silly group. If the players are fine with it and if the GM agrees to loosen the reins of the paladin/anti-paladin codes you could always play the groups for laughs. The "evil" anti-paladin who plans horrendous atrocities but then gets distracted or hungover. The paladin who always plans on settling the issue and but always has to deal with some looming disaster that's more important than the grouchy and ineffectively evil anti-paladin. The rest of the party making sure to get them drunk at the right times to ensure that nothing ever comes to a head.

But really, it sounds like a train wreck of a party and with an uncooperative GM you're probably going to have to chalk this up to a learning experience for the group.

[Siosilvar]

{Scrubbed}

[WarKitty]

Confirmed that the drow noble was DM-approved without the LA (and that the player offered to use LA to offset it, actually).

[ImperatorK]

Confirmed that the drow noble was DM-approved without the LA (and that the player offered to use LA to offset it, actually).
Well, then any problems are on his/her hands then. Is there an option for you to take something similarly powerful? It would be fair. Advanced template maybe? Or Half-Celestial?
Personally I would happily jump on the occasion to play a drow noble for free. :smallbiggrin:

@ Siosilvar
Your post isn't helping either, so... :smallannoyed:
I was at least trying to help by making sure that WarKitty knows what he/she is doing. :smallsigh: Unlike you, who just posted to tell me that I'm obtuse.
And I was trying to help WarKitty, not Luckmann. not my problem that he doesn't know the rules that he's debating.

[WarKitty]

Well, then any problems are on his/her hands then. Is there an option for you to take something similarly powerful? It would be fair. Personally I would happily jump on the occasion to play a drow noble for free. :smallbiggrin:

To be fair she gave all of us a few free benefits. I have somewhere double the HP I would otherwise have (40 at level 3) and a few social skill bonuses.

[Set]

Best to handle this sort of thing out of game and quickly, before anyone is invested in what they are playing.

Either the goods can switch to something not quite as good, or the evils can switch to something not quite as evil. The Paladin or the Antipaladin pretty much have to 'give.' One or the other. Or, hey, meet halfway and have *both* players go for something in the middle, like a pair of Barbarians or Rangers or Cavaliers or whatever.

Ideally, it should be done as a vote (with the GM as tie-breaker), with everyone deciding if the group is headed for evil, for good, or splitting the difference and playing a bunch of compatible neutral-ish folk.

Also, ideally, especially with new players, the party should have some *other* reason of being together, other than the GM-granted missions and plotlines. Perhaps they are family. Perhaps they are all outsiders in a very insular town, and have sort of banded together because all the creepy inbred fish-eyed locals are giving them untrustworthy looks and playing banjos. Perhaps they all have a magical tattoo that appeared mysteriously and drew them together. Perhaps they have all been framed for the same crime, and must clear their names. Perhaps they all just committed a crime together (and, depending on the nation and its laws, their 'crime' could be something as heinous as freeing some slaves), and have a vested interest in not getting caught (which requires them to work together, since any of them being captured could rat out the others). All could be members of the same race, all of the same tribe or clan, all of the same religion or nationality, or even, for a funky game, all members of the same class! (Four barbarians and an NPC adept with a CLW wand can be pretty scary.)

If the player of the NE assassin-drow-ninja-whatever is as grief-player / PvP as it sounds, in-game reactions are almost inevitably a mistake. That sort of thing has to be handled out of game.

[Luckmann]

{Scrub the post, scrub the quote}And as I said, if you had any evidence to the contrary, you would have mentioned it already.

All you've been capable of doing so far is to try to sell off your own "deduction" and reinterpretation of the rules as fact. When in fact, the rules for playing Drow Nobles as a Player Character says quite clearly that it's CR is equal to their Class Levels, with no mention of any addition CR or ECL equivalent.

Deal w/ it.

Confirmed that the drow noble was DM-approved without the LA (and that the player offered to use LA to offset it, actually).Well that's just silly. :smallannoyed:

[Rimeheart]

Ok, question, of the good aligned people how many of them would be willing to go evil? Since it sounds like the assassin is being stubborn... you could just have all your good characters become corrupted by the two evil characters? Or you could attempt to play it out as an understanding redeemer sorts with all of them even the antipaladin?

You could pray to your god for an atonment spell on them both? Well the paladin could any way.

[ImperatorK]

And as I said, if you had any evidence to the contrary, you would have mentioned it already.

All you've been capable of doing so far is to try to sell off your own "deduction" and reinterpretation of the rules as fact. When in fact, the rules for playing Drow Nobles as a Player Character says quite clearly that it's CR is equal to their Class Levels, with no mention of any addition CR or ECL equivalent.
Just because I didn't mention it already doesn't mean that I don't have evidence. I just wanted to be sure that WarKitty can handle it him/herself. Of course now I could just make excuses, but I don't care, think whatever you like. :smallannoyed:
And although it wasn't me who gave the evidence, it's not nice to ignore it:

If you'd come out and say that a pathfinder NPC of a standard race with a PC class has a CR equal to class levels -1 (-2 for NPC classes), and a drow noble has CR equal to class levels, so it has a +1 CR adjustment compared to standard races, you might have a leg to stand on.
Here is your evidence. It's fairly simple. And if it isn't proof enough for you then I can't help you. Either way it is the proof. :smallannoyed:

[WarKitty]

Ok, question, of the good aligned people how many of them would be willing to go evil? Since it sounds like the assassin is being stubborn... you could just have all your good characters become corrupted by the two evil characters? Or you could attempt to play it out as an understanding redeemer sorts with all of them even the antipaladin?

You could pray to your god for an atonment spell on them both? Well the paladin could any way.

Well, one of them's a paladin, so evil=no class features. My character...there's no mechanical impediment, but she's not the kind of character I can see going to the type of evil that the evil ones are prone to. I could see here going all knight templar cleanse the evildoers evil, but not the selfish evil that seems to be going on here. That's the problem with evil - an all-good party works together a lot better than an all-evil.

Anyway, I spoke to the antipaladin player and am actually fairly impressed. He's trying to roleplay her as more of a self-interested user than anything else - he picked antipaladin due to some confusion that ended with him thinking it was recommended. No one seems to be pushing the whole "spread evil and chaos" code, so I'm not too worried about him.

[Callista]

The paladin could go Blackguard, right? But not every paladin is suited for it, in terms of build or personality. For example--could you imagine a paladin like O-Chul or Hinjo going for Blackguard if he made a stupid choice and lost his powers? I sure can't.

If the guy playing the paladin is willing to switch characters, it could work out; but I'm not really sure.

Think about it out of game. Do any of the guys playing Good not like playing Evil? Because... well, I have to put myself in as an example here: I'll play Evil, short-term, and it can be fun; but it's nowhere near as fun as heroic games. I don't mean over-the-top Good; just people who are generally willing to stick up for their friends, work together, sacrifice at least somewhat for a cause--neutral or better, or some very specific kinds of antiheroic Evil; anything from the average guy who's a bit of a coward but loves his kids to the knight-in-shining-armor type who'll charge the dragon without a second thought. It's just not fun for me to play a backstabbing, scheming, nasty sort of person. Heck, I even cheer when the PCs kill my despicable villains if I'm the DM.

If you've got people like that--people who really don't like playing villains--then it seems like maybe you ought to switch to Good rather than Evil. The important thing is that everybody has fun, right? If the Evil guys don't like playing Good, then they could switch to a dark-Neutral self-interested mercenary type... I mean, you don't have to play shiny goody-two-shoes to fit in with a non-evil party.

But yeah, really you need to talk about it out of game before it turns into an incompatible party all with their own agendas; that wouldn't be fun for anybody, Good or Evil. At the very best, you'll have Good people deliberately looking the other way, Evil people deliberately not taking advantage of each other even if their characters would do so, and a bunch of people working together when by rights they should be trying to kill, arrest, or just ditch each other. Utterly unrealistic, and not a lot of fun. It's early in the campaign--you can switch out characters now and avoid that kind of awkwardness.

[Eisirt]

Well, it's the exact mirror image of the paladin, so in that sense… :smalltongue:

But really, who brings CE/NE characters into a group where people don't know each others yet, and shows up drunk or hides in a corner grieving people?

The way I read the OP, the anti-paladin player was drunk during the session; not the character.... or maybe they were both drunk.

As everyone and their pet dog had pointed out.

Above mentioned party has the life expectancy of a glass hammer... maybe even shorter.

[WarKitty]

The way I read the OP, the anti-paladin player was drunk during the session; not the character.... or maybe they were both drunk.

As everyone and their pet dog had pointed out.

Above mentioned party has the life expectancy of a glass hammer... maybe even shorter.

Just the character.

Like I said above, I really don't think rerolling characters is an option. It's not a long campaign, and most of us take several days to put a character together. I don't know if the paladin will be playing, as he hasn't shown up to either of the first two sessions. Which leaves my character as the only good one in the party...and there is no way I can convincingly do a fall from grace for this character. And I definitely can't make a character without at least a week's notice and actually be happy playing it.

[Rimeheart]

Hmm, well is your character offended by their potential evil acts or willing to let them do evil?

[WarKitty]

Hmm, well is your character offended by their potential evil acts or willing to let them do evil?

She's unlikely to interfere unless they do direct overt evil acts. Minor evil stuff she won't like but she probably won't stop them either.

[AlexTheGreat]

And as I said, if you had any evidence to the contrary, you would have mentioned it already.

All you've been capable of doing so far is to try to sell off your own "deduction" and reinterpretation of the rules as fact. When in fact, the rules for playing Drow Nobles as a Player Character says quite clearly that it's CR is equal to their Class Levels, with no mention of any addition CR or ECL equivalent.
The CR adjustment is there, it's just not spelled out. I've got no idea why ImperatorK didn't want to say, maybe he didn't know and was bluffing? :smallconfused:
Either way he was right, knowingly or not. Note that an NPC with PC classes is treated as CR = class levels - 1 (http://www.d20pfsrd.com/gamemastering#TOC-Step-3-Build-the-Encounter), but a drow noble has CR equal to his levels, so it means that there's a +1 CR. It has to come from somewhere, right? And it is even mentioned in "Drow noble Characters":

Drow nobles are defined by their class levels—they do not possess racial Hit Dice. A drow noble's challenge rating is equal to her class level. Drow nobles possess all of the racial traits listed above for drow characters, plus the following.
What more evidence do you want?