PDA

View Full Version : Player as the villainous antagonist



Talya
2007-03-31, 11:55 AM
We've been running a long time game with 4 of the same characters throughout (5 of us now)...a ranger, a cleric, a paladin, and a sorceror. (ignoring PrC Multiclasses.) I play the sorceror.

The DM has informed me of a fascinating plot idea he has for my character. He's been trying to tempt my sorceror (which has the "Heartwarder" PrC from FR Faiths & Pantheons...a divine-based Sunite class that continues sorceror spellcasting) to evil. She's attracted the attention of an arch-fiend who's trying to win her as a thrall...and thus far my alignment actions have been utterly pristine, my actions perfect. The DM has decided my character is probably incorruptable, I simply have no interest in taking her in the direction he had in mind.

He's good with that, but he's come up with a whole thrall prc and a character sheet for if I ever had my character give in to temptation...and he wants to use it. His plan is for me to be the Big Bad for a few sessions. He's going to have my character get replaced by a mirror-version of my character, while my character is trapped in the mirror. We've been coming up with the goals and motiations, but the general plan is I will play my evil twin through this, fooling the party into believing she's still the same character, but plotting to use them to achieve her diabolical goals. Since it will be my character vs. the party, eventually, I'm worried how well I should play this. This character is truly evil. (Heck, a good deal of her spell selection got swapped with spells from the book of vile darkness....she's every bit as wicked or evil as anything you can conceive of.) There are very good odds she will end up killing the party. (Kill the cleric first, the ranger is easily dominated. The spell "Morality Undone" takes care of the paladin. Our bard is turning to stone. I've got it all planned out. If I'm successful, the DM has no plans to penalize me for it, the evil character will still die...but rewards will be apportioned accordingly to my now free good character again.

I'm worried how far to take this...one of the players has a bit of a temper and can be volatile. The plot idea is great...and I relish the idea of pitting myself against my party as an evil bitch from hell...(the abyss actually, but that's a minor detail)...but this could really screw up our campaign.

Tola
2007-03-31, 12:16 PM
Is....talking to this one privately(Between you, 'Volatile' and DM) possible? So that he doesn't go completely ballistic? Or talk to the DM concerning this aspect?

Talya
2007-03-31, 12:18 PM
I suspect he's part of the reason the DM is doing it. He is really starting to despise the guy. If I don't disintegrate the cleric, I'm sure something else will soon. ;)

The guy is a hack-and-slash type. He's a cleric who thinks he's a fighter (and doesn't utilize his spells well), who hates plot. He just wants things to fight.

headwarpage
2007-03-31, 12:20 PM
In theory, any TPK or near-TPK could really screw up a campaign, and the players need to be willing to deal with that. Characters die. It happens. As long as your evil character is an appropriate challenge for the rest of the party, it all seems fine to me.

Hario
2007-03-31, 12:25 PM
Ok if and when you do this get some small notes, so when you desides to attack, when they least expect it, right it on a notecard, and fold it up and hand it to the DM (works best if you sit near them), so then players won't metagame, and then the DM will be, "everyone I need a save from you..." a TPK if needed isn't a horrible thing, just as long as everyone isn't dead by the end of it, don't go off coupe de gracing the camp while everyone is asleep, but you could lead them into a trap like in a dungeon, which is fine.

Talya
2007-03-31, 12:31 PM
Ok if and when you do this get some small notes, so when you desides to attack, when they least expect it, right it on a notecard, and fold it up and hand it to the DM (works best if you sit near them), so then players won't metagame, and then the DM will be, "everyone I need a save from you..." a TPK if needed isn't a horrible thing, just as long as everyone isn't dead by the end of it, don't go off coupe de gracing the camp while everyone is asleep, but you could lead them into a trap like in a dungeon, which is fine.

Killing them ALL actually doesn't suit her. She's an enchantress by specialty (not a true specialty, being a sorceror.) The martial types will be dominated. The bard is going to turn to glass (Dhulark's Glasstrike is an FR spell identical to "Flesh-to-stone", except it only lasts 1 hour/level.) The biggest threat to her, and the hardest to neutralize, is the cleric. He has to die before I get around to anything else. I realized that immediately. He also happens to be the biggest ass in the group...

kamikasei
2007-03-31, 12:40 PM
Killing them ALL actually doesn't suit her. She's an enchantress by specialty (not a true specialty, being a sorceror.) The martial types will be dominated. The bard is going to turn to glass (Dhulark's Glasstrike is an FR spell identical to "Flesh-to-stone", except it only lasts 1 hour/level.) The biggest threat to her, and the hardest to neutralize, is the cleric. He has to die before I get around to anything else. I realized that immediately. He also happens to be the biggest ass in the group...

If the cleric's player is the "volatile" one, I'd avoid unnecessarily antagonizing him by making his character's death your priority. What level are you all; what spells do you have access to, and what defenses has he? Something non-lethal will surely be preferable from an out-of-game perspective.

Talya
2007-03-31, 01:22 PM
I'm a level 12 sorceror for caster level purposes.

Due to multiclassing, he has insane will and fortitude saves. The only save I can work with for spell effects is Reflex. Alternately I could dominate our ranger and have him slice & diced.

Inyssius Tor
2007-03-31, 01:33 PM
So, the cleric is the only one you need to kill, right?
I would dominate the ranger and let him do the dirty work; that way, you can blame the ranger for being too effective, and the ranger can blame you for dominate'ing. (Perhaps "blame" is too evil a word, but you know what I mean; it gives you both an escape hatch.)

storybookknight
2007-03-31, 01:46 PM
Always remember, 4 on 1 is never good odds. Dominate who you're going to dominate as a surprise round, to give you better odds and to buy you time to fight everyone else.

Also, try to make the cleric waste spells on healing you (or other things) before you fight him, to give yourself better odds at messing him up.

Reptilus
2007-03-31, 01:47 PM
This isn't half so bad as when I pretended to be a paladin for an entire campaign when I was a Sorceror. The party whined and whined about how useless a paladin I was until they woke up one morning to see a couple delayed blast fireballs in the camp and me several rounds of running away if they made a good enough spot check.
So I'd go for it. At least yours isn't just random and malicious like that was.

Talya
2007-03-31, 02:25 PM
Always remember, 4 on 1 is never good odds. Dominate who you're going to dominate as a surprise round, to give you better odds and to buy you time to fight everyone else.

Also, try to make the cleric waste spells on healing you (or other things) before you fight him, to give yourself better odds at messing him up.


One step ahead of you:

In the last fight (against a dragon, most likely) they still think I'm the sorceress they all know and love--
Keep it all silent, don't let anything on to the other players.
-Dominate the ranger DURING the battle. Let him continue to attack as before.
-Near the end of the battle, Glass-strike the bard while nobody is looking.
-After the battle is over, cast vampiric touch, hold the charge, feign weakness, and ask the cleric to give her a hand standing up...

Let the chaos commence.

martyboy74
2007-03-31, 02:28 PM
Just remember, if you're too effective, the party, and thus the campaign, is dead. Be hyper effective at first, but the start making dumb mistakes. Don't forget you speech whcih reveals everything to everyone else just before you fail to kill them! :smallwink:

Talya
2007-03-31, 02:35 PM
I think the plan is I leave them in an easily escapable deathtrap and assume that they are dead.

kamikasei
2007-03-31, 02:59 PM
Ponders... If your character is a Sunite, what's her evil twin? What's happened to your real character, and what does Sune think of that?

Divine intervention, in the form of a free rez for any party members for whom your death-trap doesn't prove sufficiently easily-escapable, might be an idea (to minimize bad blood at the table).

Talya
2007-03-31, 03:25 PM
Ponders... If your character is a Sunite, what's her evil twin? What's happened to your real character, and what does Sune think of that?

Her "evil twin" is a thrall of an arch-succubus. Her twin is a mirror-duplicate (like from the hall of mirrors in Hallaster's Undermountain), and my actual character is trapped in the mirror her twin came from.


Divine intervention, in the form of a free rez for any party members for whom your death-trap doesn't prove sufficiently easily-escapable, might be an idea (to minimize bad blood at the table).

That's already looked after...there are a couple epic level NPCs involved...one of whom is an archfiend (the archsuccubus) with an interest in keeping the party (and the original Sunite version of my character) alive, despite her chaotic evil alignment.

Matthew
2007-04-02, 09:38 PM
Sounds like a fun idea. Have to be careful, though, as others have pointed out.

Falconsflight
2007-04-02, 09:52 PM
You could always do the whole Nale-elan thing. When you go to kill everyone, your character reappears to fight that person off or whatever.

Or you can have more fun. After "evil-twin" leaves them in the death trap, have original character come in to get them out. Oh yes the fun it will be. "Oh my god she's back to finish us off!" *distrust*

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-02, 10:10 PM
Coup d'grace the cleric in his sleep.

Hell, cdg them all in their sleep.

Eighth_Seraph
2007-04-02, 10:12 PM
I think that's something she'd like to avoid, but it would be an incredibly fun idea. If it were me I would completely and utterly destroy the party at the end of a hard day of adventuring when I had suffered from "A sudden and massive headache" that made me pass out for most of the day, while the rest of the party had to fight through some level-appropriate encounters. Then enter the rez and subsequent plot hook.

Actually, it'd be pretty cool if your real, Good, character were there at the time of resurrection to try and make amends...

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-02, 10:29 PM
This is why I, rogue-lover that I am, try never to neglect Sense Motive.

I'd probably be on to you before you struck.

If they don't "waste time" on such things, they deserve to be blindsided. It's a lesson.

Mewtarthio
2007-04-02, 10:31 PM
Coup d'grace the cleric in his sleep.

Hell, cdg them all in their sleep.

As mentioned above, the evil duplicate's mistress wants them all incapacitated (except the cleric, who can't be taken alive easily).

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-02, 10:47 PM
Hrm.

So many ideas....

What spells do you have? Hitting them while they sleep would be the best. Target dispel their gear so it doesn't work. Since they're unconcious, I don't think it counts as attended, and should auto fail its save. Someone correct me here.

Dominate the ranger while he sleep. He gets up, coup d'grace's the cleric (assuming you want the cleric dead). Then he full attacks the sleeping paladin (who is now armorless, and weaponless, since you took/hid his stuff). Every hit should land, and do considerable damage

Assuming he defends himself, he's going to get badly beat. He probably won't fight to the death, if he's smart. If he tries to flee, use some spell that prevents him from doing so. Then hold/dominate/etc.

You could also pick up some really good shackles and lock them all up when they sleep. Cut their tongues and fingers off so they can't cast spells.

daggaz
2007-04-03, 07:08 AM
Vampiric touch is an awesome idea, especially since the cleric is all about melee. He'll HATE losing his BaB etc.. Do it twice if at all possible.

Sam K
2007-04-03, 08:00 AM
It seems to me that the DM has it in for the cleric (possibly for a good reason) and is using this plot (and your char) to solve the problem without getting his hands dirty.

Telonius
2007-04-03, 08:15 AM
Well, there is the obvious... wait until the last encounter of the day. Use mostly scrolls that day, save your super stuff for the party fight. Make sure you go up and get into melee with whatever monster you're fighting, and get hurt pretty bad. Have the Cleric heal you and the Ranger up to full. Cleric is low on spells. Take the opportunity to Dominate the Ranger. (EDIT: Didn't see that Storybook Knight suggested something similar already)

Awetugiw
2007-04-03, 08:53 AM
I hate to be pessimistic, but this pretty much has BAD IDEA written all over it. Sure, a little backstabbing in the party once in a while can be nice. However, from what you say the party won't really take it that well. In fact, it is pretty much done in order to annoy a player.

Never take any problems you have with other players into the game. Talk it out (or in this case: let the DM talk it out) OOC. If necessary, leave the group or make him leave the group.

Only betray if you are sure the other players will understand. And try not to win.

Jayabalard
2007-04-03, 09:26 AM
I hate to be pessimistic, but this pretty much has BAD IDEA written all over it. I agree.

a couple of other thoughts on this:
1. Any advancement/rewards your evil doppleganger gets should stay on the doppleganger and not be transferable to your normal character... that's just a horrible idea.
2. In serving the ends of evil, wouldn't it be better to steer the party into evil action through deception rather than killing them outright? Evil would almost always rather have a fallen paladin than to give the forces of good a martyr.

Neon Knight
2007-04-03, 09:56 AM
Here's what I'd do:

First off, you need to play your party against itself. Secretly dominate the ranger and send him against the Paladin. Then use Morality Undone secretly (I assume this changes his alignment or robs him of his paladin powers) on him. Claim that you have recieved divine inspiration and that the Paladin has fallen because the Cleric and Bard are evil and he has associated with them. Team up with Paladin to wipe out bard and cleric.

Then cast vampiric touch, hold the charge, and ask the gallant knight to favor your hand with a kiss...

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-03, 11:21 AM
Whatever you do, you probably want to talk it out carefully with the DM to be sure you both understand exactly where this is going to go. I'd share your evil plans, too, whatever they turn out to be.

But while I think the party should ultimately have a chance to get out of this (perhaps not without having lost quite a bit first), I don't think they should be coddled. There is a reason skills like Sense Motive and spells in the Divination college exist, and it really annoys me how players disregard them because they smugly think, "Aw, the DM would never do something really sneaky."

I'm not saying Tor the Dimwit Barbarian should double as Sherlock Holmes, but I am saying that if the whole party is made up of Tor the Dimwit Barbarians, then there's a price to be paid for that, and the players should expect it. If you completely neglect your AC, you should expect to get hit by weapons (unless you have some other way to avoid them). If you completely neglect your saves, you should expect to fail them. And if you completely neglect your social/awareness skills, you should expect to miss things ... sometimes really, really important things.

Giving people a free pass because what they neglected was social/awareness-based is coddling, and it encourages them to just make "kick in the door"-style characters because they "know" they'll only ever need to be able to kill things. I really think the group should get a lesson.

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-03, 11:59 AM
But while I think the party should ultimately have a chance to get out of this (perhaps not without having lost quite a bit first), I don't think they should be coddled. There is a reason skills like Sense Motive and spells in the Divination college exist, and it really annoys me how players disregard them because they smugly think, "Aw, the DM would never do something really sneaky."
...
Giving people a free pass because what they neglected was social/awareness-based is coddling, and it encourages them to just make "kick in the door"-style characters because they "know" they'll only ever need to be able to kill things. I really think the group should get a lesson.At the same time, though, it's possible that there are characters in the party who could reasonably succeed the checks, or know the right spells, to detect the traitor. But it's well past "not coddling" for the DM to allow/encourage the infiltrator to devastate the group because no one thought to make those checks or cast those spells on their ally. That just encourages the entire party to be obsessively paranoid from that point on, which isn't really fun either.

What needs to happen is for the DM to make some realistic, but secret, checks on the behalf of the other party members even if the players don't suspect anything. If they fail, they fail. But it would be unfair to run it like "wow, turns out your trusted companion was a demon all along, and killed you in your sleep. Don't you feel stupid for not casting Detect Evil on him, hahaha."

Not that I necessarily think you're advocating something like that, Nowhere Girl, but I think it's imortant to be aware of the dangers of going too far in either direction.

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-03, 12:06 PM
At the same time, though, it's possible that there are characters in the party who could reasonably succeed the checks, or know the right spells, to detect the traitor. But it's well past "not coddling" for the DM to allow/encourage the infiltrator to devastate the group because no one thought to make those checks or cast those spells on their ally. That just encourages the entire party to be obsessively paranoid from that point on, which isn't really fun either.

They really don't have to be. The moment you attempt to deceive me, I'm automatically entitled to a Sense Motive check against you. I don't have to ask for it. I don't even have to know it's being rolled (and it's probably better if I don't). It's like Spot and Listen: it just happens, even when I'm not actively trying to use it.

And you can bet that the moment I catch you being deceptive, I'm going to start looking harder at you and making an active Sense Motive check (look under "Hunch"). Before long, I'm going to know you're an imposter unless you're as good at lying as I am at spotting liars.

If I bothered to train the skill, that is.

Edit: Oops, almost forgot -- since it's a mirror version of the original character and not the original person, said mirror version is also effectively in disguise. That means it needs to be making Disguise checks against the Spot checks of the PCs. It probably gets a fantastic bonus to the skill right off, which is fine, but of course it will also incur penalties because the subject it's impersonating is at least "recognizes on sight" and probably a "friend or associate" or better. Did anyone in the party bother to train Spot ...?

SpiderBrigade
2007-04-03, 12:09 PM
Good, I think we're on the same page there :smallwink: Like I said, I just wanted to clarify that it's possible to go beyond "not coddling" and into "screwing over" without much effort.

BlueWizard
2007-04-03, 12:15 PM
A player should not be forced to doing a DMs will... too much. An occasional quest, but turning you against the party! Blah! I've had a few poeple do it, but they were evil PCs, and wanted to do it. Eventually they had to work out that PC, and make a new one.

Tor the Fallen
2007-04-03, 12:25 PM
Tor the Dimwit Barbarian

Gee, that's not nice.

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-03, 12:30 PM
Gee, that's not nice.

Oops. :smalleek:

I swear I wasn't thinking of you when I wrote that! I just grabbed a random simple name out of my head. Sorry! :smallredface:

Inyssius Tor
2007-04-03, 12:33 PM
Apology accepted! :smallbiggrin:

Aquillion
2007-04-03, 12:35 PM
Another possibility to consider: Are you good friends with the person you plan to dominate (outside of the game, I mean)? If you are, and trust them not to metagame or give it away, you might try telling them what you're doing in advance. That way, they can be part of your plan even though their excuse is "I was dominated."

Talya
2007-04-03, 03:42 PM
My character is a level 13 bard/sorceror/heartwarder* with a charisma of 26, lots of ranks in bluff, and +4 in various other bonuses to all charisma skills.

Bring on the sense motive checks.
(The evil mirror-me will be thrall of <demon> as a PRC instead of heartwarder. Also with charisma boosts.)

Eighth_Seraph
2007-04-03, 04:11 PM
IT's really not the lesson I'm worried about; to me, this is just a really good twist in a story that I would love to be a part of. I mean, too often in campaigns the twists in turns are foreseeable or even expected, all the while steering to a happy ending. Even if I were to lose my character off of something like this, it'd still be worth it because it was a good story element that I genuinely was not expecting.

It all depends on the party's attitude, though I'm not sure they all appreciate a good story as much as I do.

Jayabalard
2007-04-03, 05:02 PM
It all depends on the party's attitude, though I'm not sure they all appreciate a good story as much as I do. or whether they consider "good guy gets to reap the rewards of betrayal and other evil with no repercussions" to be a good story...

Dragor
2007-04-03, 05:13 PM
My idea is thus:

Try and make the evil replacement less like the original, good sorceror. Make her say things she wouldn't usually say, act as she wouldn't normally act. Try and give the game away slightly- surely the evil twin doesn't know everything about the party? The things which would be common knowledge to the good character may not necessarily known by the evil equivalent. If the PC's catch the scent of where it's all heading, then it's time for the evil sorceress of death and destruction come out to play. Cue evil monologue, cue big fight. Try and fight to the best of your ability, because now you don't have the element of surprise.

And from then on, it should all go swimmingly.

Well.

I think....

Talya
2007-04-03, 05:37 PM
My idea is thus:

Try and make the evil replacement less like the original, good sorceror. Make her say things she wouldn't usually say, act as she wouldn't normally act. Try and give the game away slightly- surely the evil twin doesn't know everything about the party? The things which would be common knowledge to the good character may not necessarily known by the evil equivalent. If the PC's catch the scent of where it's all heading, then it's time for the evil sorceress of death and destruction come out to play. Cue evil monologue, cue big fight. Try and fight to the best of your ability, because now you don't have the element of surprise.

And from then on, it should all go swimmingly.

Well.

I think....


Absolutely.

SMDVogrin
2007-04-03, 08:19 PM
My idea is thus:

Try and make the evil replacement less like the original, good sorceror. Make her say things she wouldn't usually say, act as she wouldn't normally act. Try and give the game away slightly- surely the evil twin doesn't know everything about the party? The things which would be common knowledge to the good character may not necessarily known by the evil equivalent.

Even better, have the DM make a bunch of those Disguise vs Spot checks and Bluff vs Sense Motive checks. Every failure on each one, you intentionally drop some major clue in your actions towards the party...

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-03, 10:21 PM
My character is a level 13 bard/sorceror/heartwarder* with a charisma of 26, lots of ranks in bluff, and +4 in various other bonuses to all charisma skills.

Bring on the sense motive checks.
(The evil mirror-me will be thrall of <demon> as a PRC instead of heartwarder. Also with charisma boosts.)

Well, I would probably have both Spot and Sense Motive maxed, but that's because I treat Intelligence and not Dexterity as the rogue primary stat, so I tend to have skill points to burn (relatively speaking -- in reality, I never have enough skill points to be satisfied) while the Dex-monkeys let most of their skills fall behind and are forced to either heavily specialize or be mediocre at everything.

But it sounds like you'd be a challenge even then. Good! You're the perfect candidate for the job. :smallbiggrin:

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-03, 10:34 PM
Even better, have the DM make a bunch of those Disguise vs Spot checks and Bluff vs Sense Motive checks. Every failure on each one, you intentionally drop some major clue in your actions towards the party...

No, that doesn't really work because if someone actually beats her on a Spot vs. Disguise or Sense Motive vs. Bluff contest, that person is entitled to a lot more than just her dropping a clue. If I beat you with a Sense Motive check, I just caught you using body language that conflicted with what you were saying. If I beat you with a Spot check, I just caught something amiss with your portrayal of the person you supposedly are. It has nothing to do with whether I, as the player, catch on to something -- my character noticed something wrong. That's the point of those skills.

That's not the same thing as the evil duplicate saying something that doesn't quite fit because she lacks the proper background information. There's really no "rules" mechanic for that, to my knowledge -- instead, I think it would make the most sense to simply make a list of everything that the duplicate knows (and thinks she knows) about the person she's impersonating and then play her essentially as a different character (which she is), using that information and nothing else. If she comes to something she doesn't know about the real sorceress, she'll probably try to either avoid the topic or fake it somehow (might call for immediate Sense Motive either way, as people tend to give subtle -- and sometimes not-so-subtle -- signals when they're caught off-guard). If she comes to something she thinks she knows but is incorrect about, she really might give the game away no matter how smoothly she tells her lie ...

... provided, of course, the players are paying attention. :smallwink:

Edit: Also keep in mind that no matter how good this duplicate is at disguise and deception, if there's at least one person with enough relevant skill to have at least a chance of success, over time the odds of the duplicate eventually getting caught grow. As a liar, you have to get it right every time. As the person you're lying to, I only have to notice once.

Talya
2007-04-03, 10:41 PM
It should be stated that the evil duplicate IS my character. it's the same person. It's not someone pretending to be my character. It's my character, if she'd been corrupted by evil. She's not "bluffing" or in "disguise" by pretending to be me, she IS me.

If she outright lies to them, (which she will have to once or twice), then yes, they could detect it with sense motive. Of course, sometimes you just need to tell the truth, but not everything. And sense motive on that will only get you the fact that she's "holding something back."

By the RAW, there's nothing that says someone's entitled to a secret sense motive check every time they are lied to...that's rather up to DM discretion, but I would agree that anytime someone uses the bluff skill on you, the DM should ask for a roll (or do it secretly if more appropriate.) However, there should also be heavy negative modifiers if it is told by a person they know well and have learned to trust, unless the player asks for the check because they are suspicious.

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-03, 11:05 PM
It should be stated that the evil duplicate IS my character. it's the same person. It's not someone pretending to be my character. It's my character, if she'd been corrupted by evil. She's not "bluffing" or in "disguise" by pretending to be me, she IS me.

Oh, I see. That's interesting. If she's literally an alternate you, then that begs the question: is she considered to be in disguise, or if she considered to be actually you?

Personally, I would say the former is still true. After all, you are not whom you are if you'd been corrupted by evil; you're you. Those are subtlely different people, even if, technically speaking, they have the same genetic code. Really, they're the same people as one another only to the extent that identical twins are the same people as one another.

But I think an identical twin, or in this case an identical evil twin, certainly would be entitled to a hefty Disguise bonus ...


If she outright lies to them, (which she will have to once or twice), then yes, they could detect it with sense motive. Of course, sometimes you just need to tell the truth, but not everything. And sense motive on that will only get you the fact that she's "holding something back."

That depends on how intelligently they talk to you. If someone notices you "holding something back" and asks if there's anything else, and you then flat-out lie (and also get caught doing that), you're starting to draw attention to yourself (in the form of that person becoming curious/suspicious).

Bear in mind that you incur penalties if you try to lie to someone who's already suspicious.


By the RAW, there's nothing that says someone's entitled to a secret sense motive check every time they are lied to

Bluff is opposed by Sense Motive. If you lie, you are using Bluff. It's automatic -- anytime you lie, you are using Bluff, because that skill governs how effectively you are able to lie (no matter what the exact wording of the lie is). Ergo, every time someone is lied to, that person is entitled to a Sense Motive check, yes. That's the point of those two skills. Bluff is to Hide as Sense Motive is to Spot.


...that's rather up to DM discretion

Well, the DM could also just let someone who's hidden automatically remain hidden without allowing anyone a Spot check, but that's more a case of the DM just doing things arbitrarily than anything meaningful.


but I would agree that anytime someone uses the bluff skill on you, the DM should ask for a roll

No. No, no, no. Never this for social contests dealing with deception.


(or do it secretly if more appropriate.)

Definitely this. By the way, clever DMs arbitrarily roll their dice from time to time even when there's nothing to roll for. It keeps players guessing. :smallwink:


However, there should also be heavy negative modifiers if it is told by a person they know well and have learned to trust, unless the player asks for the check because they are suspicious.

First, that depends on how much they trust you. Some characters never fully trust people, or if they trust anyone, it's maybe one person in the whole world. People who have high levels of skill in things like Sense Motive tend not to be terribly trusting; after all, they're already aware of how much and how often people lie. They've had training in spotting liars. They watch people lie every day, even if they don't say anything about it.

Rogues also tend to frequently be the shadowy types of people who keep half an eye on everyone, even their own friends, because they know what people can be like (after all, they know what they can be like). They don't have to be those types of people, but they very frequently are. Coincidentally, rogues have a lot of skill points and Sense Motive as a class skill. :smallwink:

To put it another way, just because I work with you doesn't mean I trust you. A lot of adventurers (not all, but a lot) are going to live by that to some degree.

Mewtarthio
2007-04-03, 11:37 PM
It should be stated that the evil duplicate IS my character. it's the same person. It's not someone pretending to be my character. It's my character, if she'd been corrupted by evil. She's not "bluffing" or in "disguise" by pretending to be me, she IS me.

In that case, the closest I can think of is the Sense Motive check for noticing that someone's been enchanted. Effectively, you've been enchanted into doing evil deeds (actually, a precise duplicate of you was created, and that duplicate was designed to do evil deeds, but as far as mechanics go its the same thing). Since you're going to disguise it, however, some sort of bonus to the DC based on Bluff might be in order. I don't know exactly what, however.

PnP Fan
2007-04-04, 12:09 AM
Um. . yeah, this sounds like a patented and trademarked Bad Idea (tm).
I've done this once, a long time ago, and it went badly. PC's died, one at a time, no clue as to whodunnit, folks panicking because the doppleganger PC was killing them in the night. I'm glad to see that you aren't going down that road, because you'd win, and then you'd lose as everyone walks out. Sure, you might get rid of that one player you don't want around any more, but you'll also be the player that no one wants to play with anymore, y'know 'cause you can't be trusted, and the same goes for the DM that put you in that situation in the first place. Trust me, you might feel all jazzed up about being all conspiratorial and what not, but this will go badly. What it will look like to your fellow players is that you and the DM teamed up against the rest of them (which is effectively what happened, since it sounds like your DM didn't do any of the Sense-Motive checks for his players that he should have).
My suggestion that might help avoid the irritation of inter-party conflict is if, as soon as "The Smackdown" starts, you hand over the character sheet to the DM, to make it clear that you were only cooperating for the sake of "good RP", and let the DM run it from there.
The other thing that might help things out a bit is if your group has this sort of inter-party conflict regularly, and you are accustomed to your fellow adventurers stabbing you in the back.

Best of luck.

Jothki
2007-04-04, 01:34 AM
Since she is a duplicate that doesn't normally exist (in this reality, or at all depending upon how the mirror thing works), wouldn't the arch-fiend not recognize her as a loyal minion? If you want to avoid a TPK, if she wins she could attempt to summon the arch-fiend to consume their souls or something but end up being chomped on by a confused and annoyed demon.

Quietus
2007-04-04, 03:27 AM
I like the idea of handing the sheet to the DM for the final fight.

BETTER IDEA, HOWEVER...

Speak to the DM. Have the plan made that the evil-you will summon a bunch of other mooks, while *someone* (Sune, you said? Or something like that) breaks whatever it is that's holding you in the mirror or whatnot. That way, you get to participate in the fight, alongside your friends (Want to cue the big fight? What happens when your friends see YOU come running up, when you're right there?), while the evil-you is played entirely by the DM and keeps your hands clean, making the entire party happier. After all, the DM is SUPPOSED to be attempting to kill you. The other party members aren't.

Jayabalard
2007-04-04, 09:26 AM
It should be stated that the evil duplicate IS my character. it's the same person. It's not someone pretending to be my character. It's my character, if she'd been corrupted by evil. She's not "bluffing" or in "disguise" by pretending to be me, she IS me.As you've stated, your character is good, and has no interest in turning to evil, is pretty much uncorruptable, and is trapped in a mirror. So it sounds very much like this is not actually your character, and there have to be some pretty significant differences in character, belief structure, opinions on morality, etc... or else this evil doppganger won't actually be able to be evil, and that makes it a different character.

PnP Fan lays out pretty well why this is a Bad Idea(tm), so there's not much point in repeating it.

Talya
2007-04-04, 09:43 AM
Since she is a duplicate that doesn't normally exist (in this reality, or at all depending upon how the mirror thing works), wouldn't the arch-fiend not recognize her as a loyal minion? If you want to avoid a TPK, if she wins she could attempt to summon the arch-fiend to consume their souls or something but end up being chomped on by a confused and annoyed demon.

You're on to something with our intended plot. The arch-fiend certainly DOES know it, and she's intrigued. However, evil-me has wicked plans to kill the archfiend and take over her abyssal layer. Arch-fiend will ironically become a temporary ally of the party.

We've sorta built plans for how this plays out no matter how well the party vs. my character goes...the only "downside" is the party wins, no matter if I fool them, beat them or they discover and beat me. In the interests in not screwing me over for playing well, if evil-me looks victorious, NPCs will need to come to the rescue. If Evil-me loses, well, then the party will discover it's not me and set me free.

Talya
2007-04-04, 09:44 AM
I like the idea of handing the sheet to the DM for the final fight.

BETTER IDEA, HOWEVER...

Speak to the DM. Have the plan made that the evil-you will summon a bunch of other mooks, while *someone* (Sune, you said? Or something like that) breaks whatever it is that's holding you in the mirror or whatnot. That way, you get to participate in the fight, alongside your friends (Want to cue the big fight? What happens when your friends see YOU come running up, when you're right there?), while the evil-you is played entirely by the DM and keeps your hands clean, making the entire party happier. After all, the DM is SUPPOSED to be attempting to kill you. The other party members aren't.

This is actually part of the plan. Not Sune herself, but something similar. At a certain point during the fight, I take over as myself again and the DM continues using evil me.

Nowhere Girl
2007-04-04, 02:31 PM
I still say the party would deserve it if they can't help themselves, but that's mostly because I despise the typical "of course I'm a halfling with maximized Dexterity" rogue who only has a handful of well-trained skills, pretty much all of those Dexterity-based (and never social). Those people deserve to lose when they encounter intrigue. Badly. Horribly. Just as badly, in fact, as an intrigue-only character loses in a dungeon crawl.

The others have a point, though, but I still wouldn't hesitate to punish the players for being optimized for only one thing at the expense of all else (because, using metagame logic, they "know" they'll never need social/awareness skills).

Tobrian
2007-04-04, 03:49 PM
Well, be careful with this PC-vs-PC stuff. THere's a good chance the other players will never trust you and any of your characters afterwards again.


My suggestion that might help avoid the irritation of inter-party conflict is if, as soon as "The Smackdown" starts, you hand over the character sheet to the DM, to make it clear that you were only cooperating for the sake of "good RP", and let the DM run it from there.

That's a good advice. It takes away the whole you-vs-us angle.