PC Accidentally Nabbed the MacGuffin... What Do I Do!?

[HolyCouncilMagi]

Long story short, I need to figure out a way to weaken (and thereby balance) something before next session without it seeming like BS and without downplaying the accomplishment of the character who acquired it at the end of the previous session.

I'm not a big fan of railroading. I also don't mind letting players put their characters into situations where they aren't yet strong enough to make many real differences, if they choose to do so, but if they do make actual differences I don't discount them (see above "not a big fan of railroading"). So when two armies met on a mountain where one of the potential BBEGs (I introduce several in case some get foiled early) was trying to take an NPC, whose only connection to the PCs were a couple of conversations and being the friend of one character's sister, to sacrifice at the shrine on the peak in order to awaken and bind to himself a god sealed within an organic blade, I figured the PCs would either try a rescue mission before the (?)BBEG(?) could reach the shrine, or they'd leave it to the NPCs who currently had the bigger guns while they went off to try to find ways to counter the BBEG if he succeeded. This may seem like an unrealistic expectation on my part, but that's the sort of behaviour I'm used to from these guys, especially when they're at lower-level... They try to thwart the bad guys covertly or find their own solutions to problems. (Makes for great gaming, mind you.)

Instead, they decided to partake in the main battle itself to protect the shrine.

I thought it was odd, but I let it go, expecting that they had a plan. The battle joined, and they did push the fight well in the good guys' favor, certainly more than I expected, until the potential BBEG showed up with a powerful second-in-command and the sacrifice. Said second-in-command had a big fight with most of the party and the NPCs they had protected/assisted up to that point, but one of the PCs went to help the good guy army's leader in holding back the BBEG-in-training. (There're very few good ways to refer to that role, geez.) Eventually, the BEG (:smallfurious:) was almost set to succeed, and most of the party (plus the major NPCs they had saved from death at the hands of the second-in-command, which I honestly expected to be the party's main contribution in all this) teleported out, with the exception of PC who had been set to stop the BEG. His plan was to escape with aforementioned good guy army leader when he 'ported out, since he hadn't been ready to leave when the others split off.

Anyway, bad guy was preparing to perform the sacrifice, as it was a short ritual and it would have allowed him to end the battle more quickly. Then out comes the PC for one last go, and two bad rolls on the BEG's part (natural 1 Fortitude save against Sudden Stunning, reroll due to an ability, then a 3) mean he ends up Stunned for one round. Being the heroic sort, I figured the PC would pick up the girl (who was laid out for sacrificing) and try to run towards the good guy leader for teleporting away. We were coming close to the end of the session, too, and I figured that would've been a great dramatic spot to leave things.

Instead, thinking he wouldn't have time to both pick up the girl and get away, he picks up the bad guy's god-sword and performs the sacrifice himself, hoping to foil the bad guy's plan by binding the newly-awakened god to himself...

So I basically left the session off with a big gout of darkness rising out of the new corpse to consume the character. Dramatic enough, but definitely nothing I was even close to prepared for.

Ignoring for the moment that I'm considering dropping his alignment from a high-flown Good right to Neutral (and it would be unquestionably straight to Evil if he knew there was soul-destroying involved, but that wasn't something the PCs had learned; a heart-wrenching thing to break to him, since after the session he mentioned that he wanted to eventually return and use Raise Dead on her and apologize) I need to figure out a fair way to not make the PC completely broken compared to the other party members on account of the new weapon he just gained.

My two major thoughts on how to do this reasonably are this, and at this point I'm considering doing one or both:

First, the major bad guy here had studied this extensively, and would have had lots of magical defenses prepared so that he could wield the weapon safely. Lacking these, using the weapon at all could very well be dangerous to the PC and/or impose penalties, since the awakened god is rather malignant in nature.

Second, it could be a level-scaling weapon. By the time the PCs reach the level the bad guy was at, the weapon might be as strong as it would have been for him, but at this level it's more "clear upgrade from previous weapon" and less "super OP god powers that make the other PCs useless."

Do either or both of those seem like good ideas? Or do you guys have some other ways I could make this fair in terms of his power compared to that of the other PCs without downplaying everything that happened in this giant battle? I don't want to just not let him have it, but I also obviously can't just let him have the full power of an item that, had things gone according to the bad guy's plan, would have turned him from an appropriate fight for a level 12-13ish party into an appropriate fight for a level 20 party...

So yeah. Thanks in advance for any help in finding good compromises.

(And I'm only here for the mechanical advice... I can work out the RP consequences myself. Hint: They'll be delicious.)

[ZamielVanWeber]

Make it a Weapon of Legacy type deal (you will need to do some homebrew since WoL's penalties can be brutal).
The weapon itself kinda sucks at the moment, but is obviously more powerful than it appears. Performing specific rituals unlocks the weapons powers, but the character has to be a certain level to gain the benefit.

[Jack_Simth]

Heh. There is no plan a PC will not throw a monkey wrench into.

There's a lot of different ways to slice it. Here's two:

There's actually several rituals involved; each one loosens the bindings a little more (granting more power), but each one is also as evil as the first (so for now, it's a +1 Vile weapon [damage from the weapon does not heal]; the next sacrifice makes it a +2 Vampiric [deals an extra 1d6 damage to living targets, and the wielder is healed by the amount of the extra damage] Vile weapon; the next sacrifice makes it a +3 Vampiric Unholy [standard property] Vile weapon; and so on). There's a slightly-hidden aspect, however: The trapped entity wants out, and as each sacrifice loosens the bonds, the trapped entity gets more control over the wielder. Treat as an Intelligent Magic Item; each sacrifice boosts the ego by the appropriate weapon properties, moves it up a category (which increases the mental scores - and with it, the ego - and adds additional intelligent-item-specific abilities... which also increase the ego), and grants the weapon a +2 bump to Ego besides. The weapon wants the rituals done, and that will save happens every time the weapon is drawn. If the PC fails the save, the PC is compelled to act out the ritual the next time a suitable helpless target is around. This will usually be a different PC while the one in question is on the night watch. Oh yes, and it's cursed; he can't get rid of it easily.

The weapon draws on the wielder directly. It applies a penalty to his Con score equal to twice it's enhancement bonus, and this number can be changed with one minute of concentration per point of enhancement shifted. It can even do special weapon abilities similarly (so if the player wanted it to be, say, +1 Ghost Touch, it'd take two minutes of concentration and would apply a -4 penalty to his Con score). The enhancement bonus doesn't have a maximum (want a +20 weapon? OK. Take -40 to Con). If he dies while wielding it, the weapon spawns a Devourer (http://www.d20srd.org/srd/monsters/devourer.htm) which auto-captures the wielder's soul.

[Venger]

Long story short, I need to figure out a way to weaken (and thereby balance) something before next session without it seeming like BS and without downplaying the accomplishment of the character who acquired it at the end of the previous session.

I'm not a big fan of railroading. I also don't mind letting players put their characters into situations where they aren't yet strong enough to make many real differences, if they choose to do so, but if they do make actual differences I don't discount them (see above "not a big fan of railroading"). So when two armies met on a mountain where one of the potential BBEGs (I introduce several in case some get foiled early) was trying to take an NPC, whose only connection to the PCs were a couple of conversations and being the friend of one character's sister, to sacrifice at the shrine on the peak in order to awaken and bind to himself a god sealed within an organic blade, I figured the PCs would either try a rescue mission before the (?)BBEG(?) could reach the shrine, or they'd leave it to the NPCs who currently had the bigger guns while they went off to try to find ways to counter the BBEG if he succeeded. This may seem like an unrealistic expectation on my part, but that's the sort of behaviour I'm used to from these guys, especially when they're at lower-level... They try to thwart the bad guys covertly or find their own solutions to problems. (Makes for great gaming, mind you.)

Instead, they decided to partake in the main battle itself to protect the shrine.

I thought it was odd, but I let it go, expecting that they had a plan. The battle joined, and they did push the fight well in the good guys' favor, certainly more than I expected, until the potential BBEG showed up with a powerful second-in-command and the sacrifice. Said second-in-command had a big fight with most of the party and the NPCs they had protected/assisted up to that point, but one of the PCs went to help the good guy army's leader in holding back the BBEG-in-training. (There're very few good ways to refer to that role, geez.) Eventually, the BEG (:smallfurious:) was almost set to succeed, and most of the party (plus the major NPCs they had saved from death at the hands of the second-in-command, which I honestly expected to be the party's main contribution in all this) teleported out, with the exception of PC who had been set to stop the BEG. His plan was to escape with aforementioned good guy army leader when he 'ported out, since he hadn't been ready to leave when the others split off.

Anyway, bad guy was preparing to perform the sacrifice, as it was a short ritual and it would have allowed him to end the battle more quickly. Then out comes the PC for one last go, and two bad rolls on the BEG's part (natural 1 Fortitude save against Sudden Stunning, reroll due to an ability, then a 3) mean he ends up Stunned for one round. Being the heroic sort, I figured the PC would pick up the girl (who was laid out for sacrificing) and try to run towards the good guy leader for teleporting away. We were coming close to the end of the session, too, and I figured that would've been a great dramatic spot to leave things.

Instead, thinking he wouldn't have time to both pick up the girl and get away, he picks up the bad guy's god-sword and performs the sacrifice himself, hoping to foil the bad guy's plan by binding the newly-awakened god to himself...

So I basically left the session off with a big gout of darkness rising out of the new corpse to consume the character. Dramatic enough, but definitely nothing I was even close to prepared for.

I usually call the guy in training "lieutenant"


Ignoring for the moment that I'm considering dropping his alignment from a high-flown Good right to Neutral (and it would be unquestionably straight to Evil if he knew there was soul-destroying involved, but that wasn't something the PCs had learned; a heart-wrenching thing to break to him, since after the session he mentioned that he wanted to eventually return and use Raise Dead on her and apologize) I need to figure out a fair way to not make the PC completely broken compared to the other party members on account of the new weapon he just gained.


um, why?

no seriously, why?

this is D&D. death isn't anything more than a slap on the wrist. if he said (and meant) that he was gonna rez her when he had enough money saved up in his piggy bank, then where exactly is the harm?

as you said yourself, he took away the opportunity for the bad guy to sacrifice the victim and take power for themselves, which was the pressing concern at the time, and you did lead him to believe he had time to only do one thing, either save the hostage (in which case they'd just get a new one) or remove the relic from the table, which he did.

when he's got enough money, the victim can either stay in heaven if she wants, or come back to earth if that's more her speed. I doubt the bad guys would've done the same.





My two major thoughts on how to do this reasonably are this, and at this point I'm considering doing one or both:

First, the major bad guy here had studied this extensively, and would have had lots of magical defenses prepared so that he could wield the weapon safely. Lacking these, using the weapon at all could very well be dangerous to the PC and/or impose penalties, since the awakened god is rather malignant in nature.

Second, it could be a level-scaling weapon. By the time the PCs reach the level the bad guy was at, the weapon might be as strong as it would have been for him, but at this level it's more "clear upgrade from previous weapon" and less "super OP god powers that make the other PCs useless."

Do either or both of those seem like good ideas? Or do you guys have some other ways I could make this fair in terms of his power compared to that of the other PCs without downplaying everything that happened in this giant battle? I don't want to just not let him have it, but I also obviously can't just let him have the full power of an item that, had things gone according to the bad guy's plan, would have turned him from an appropriate fight for a level 12-13ish party into an appropriate fight for a level 20 party...

So yeah. Thanks in advance for any help in finding good compromises.

(And I'm only here for the mechanical advice... I can work out the RP consequences myself. Hint: They'll be delicious.)

you could just talk to your player, explain you goofed, and ask for a mulligan. say that the sacrifice was only the first of more than one ritual they needed to do to fully activate the thing, and it only gives power A instead of power B. I don't see any reason he'd complain if you just talked to him rather than trying to be tricky in the game and take away what he got in the story.

when you set up an in-game obstacle, players will work around it. when you set up an out of game obstacle (e.g. "hey guys, general agreement no thought bottles, okay?") then they're less likely to try to undermine it.

[Bronk]

I like the previous ideas, but how about this... give the guy a mulligan since he seems to feel bad about his character's actions.

The BBEG in training has this sword with a god in it, sure, but why is it in there? Maybe it's an intellingent item or artifact of good that has the god trapped with it's power!

The fights, the overall battle, and finally the sacrifice was all so that the sword of good would be weakened and the god could come out.

The PC made a dumb choice, slashed down at the girl/sacrifice, and was surrounded in a cloud of smoke!

Boom, he's in the Dreamheart or having a vision or something! He's on a cusp of possibility, with both the god and the Sword evenly matched. They both offer him a choice, help the god and gain evil power (maybe a template, a link to a god, and the sword becomes a pretty decent magic sword) or...

... Help the sword! The sword wins the fight (for now) and the sacrifice is spared (maybe it doesn't cut, or becomes merciful at the last second or something). The PC gains a cool magic sword, but now he's charged both with fighting evil and making sure the god doesn't ever get the upper hand. Maybe the PC can use that as a character point and become a Paladin while he's at it.

There's a third party book of artifacts that has a powerful holy avenger type sword that A: gives you paladin abilities almost like gestalt or the artifact shield in the DMG/SRD and B: makes you fight evil even if it's inconvenient. Just an idea.

[Jack_Simth]

um, why?

no seriously, why?

this is D&D. death isn't anything more than a slap on the wrist. if he said (and meant) that he was gonna rez her when he had enough money saved up in his piggy bank, then where exactly is the harm? Well, for one thing, it was noted as being a soul-destroying weapon....

[Terazul]

Well, for one thing, it was noted as being a soul-destroying weapon....

No, it wasn't. At least not in a context that the PC could have known:


and it would be unquestionably straight to Evil if he knew there was soul-destroying involved, but that wasn't something the PCs had learned;

Also really, the guy immediately afterwards said he planned to resurrect the character and apologize. Yeah, that's totally blatant intentional Evil right there. :smallannoyed: He doesn't deserve an alignment shift for playing the hand he was dealt, especially given the character is troubled that it had to come down to that. Don't punish the Good guy for trying to be Good.

That being said, if you intend to let him keep it, I'd go with the Custom Weapon of Legacy route, just get rid of the penalties entirely though and let him start with the Least Legacy. This lets it start off as a good (+1 something) sword, but it's not ridiculously powerful while he needs to "attune" to it. Let him forge his own Legacies and help him choose abilities appropriate to the deeds. It can even become it's own personal arc thing, as he tries to forge it from a weapon of soul-destroying into a weapon of redemption. Those are always nice.

Alternatively talk to him and say you weren't expecting that, and voice your concerns about the item throwing off the balance for the rest of the campaign. Assuming your player/friend is reasonable, you can probably come to a consensus.

[fishyfishyfishy]

I say stick to your guns and let this PC inadvertently let a super evil deity out into the world. Have him become consumed by this thing and become an avatar of evil on the prime material plane. PC's soul is consumed and now there's a new BBEG the players will give a damn about stopping. The tragedy of it all will spur them on. Offer the player an opportunity to play a new character, or take over one of the NPCs they may have taken a liking too.

Sometimes players just play the game. And other times they present you with amazing opportunities for excellent storytelling that will draw them in even more.

Editing this to add in that regardless of whatever you choose to do, you should be up front about your intentions with the player and have them on the same page as you.

[ryu]

I say stick to your guns and let this PC inadvertently let a super evil deity out into the world. Have him become consumed by this thing and become an avatar of evil on the prime material plane. PC's soul is consumed and now there's a new BBEG the players will give a damn about stopping. The tragedy of it all will spur them on. Offer the player an opportunity to play a new character, or take over one of the NPCs they may have taken a liking too.

Sometimes players just play the game. And other times they present you with amazing opportunities for excellent storytelling that will draw them in even more.

As a general point it's usually bad form to off someone's character for having won a fight harder than you expected. It's also bad form to off someone's character without even some sort of real fight or challenge occurring. Now some new plot hook involving the sword being a quest item until some later point when it becomes cool? Fine.

[Segev]

Maybe shift him more towards Chaotic rather than more towards Evil, based on the impulsiveness of his act.

As for power... make it an intelligent weapon, and have a large portion of its powers be based on its goodwill and cooperation. Stat out its powers and lock the ones you don't want him to have behind a wall of temptation.

"Look at your alignment. Now look at me. Now look at your alignment.
Sadly, it is not me. But it could be like me, if you would embrace evil.
Now look at your weapon. What is it? It's me!
Now look at it again. The weapon is now divine!
Anything is possible when you serve my will.
I am on a nightmare."

[fishyfishyfishy]

As a general point it's usually bad form to off someone's character for having won a fight harder than you expected. It's also bad form to off someone's character without even some sort of real fight or challenge occurring. Now some new plot hook involving the sword being a quest item until some later point when it becomes cool? Fine.

That depends on the level of trust your players have for you as DM and their maturity. The character made a questionable choice with noble intentions. That doesn't always turn out well.

[ryu]

That depends on the level of trust your players have for you as DM and their maturity. The character made a questionable choice with noble intentions. That doesn't always turn out well.

The choice wasn't exactly questionable given the knowledge he had at the time. Now say if he were a wizard with literal access to knowledge of the future and the will to use it I could see lack of knowledge as insufficient excuse. In this case though? Inventing entirely new harm clauses after the fact on the person who did the only practical thing in the situation is silly. Even if he didn't fully intend to have the victim raised I'd still call him neutral. As it stands? Good with a capital G. Why? How many supposedly ''good'' PCs would you expect to throw down the resources for a true res for someone else especially without prompting?

[fishyfishyfishy]

The choice wasn't exactly questionable given the knowledge he had at the time. Now say if he were a wizard with literal access to knowledge of the future and the will to use it I could see lack of knowledge as insufficient excuse. In this case though? Inventing entirely new harm clauses after the fact on the person who did the only practical thing in the situation is silly. Even if he didn't fully intend to have the victim raised I'd still call him neutral. As it stands? Good with a capital G. Why? How many supposedly ''good'' PCs would you expect to throw down the resources for a true res for someone else especially without prompting?

I don't think you understood my suggestion at all. It was also hardly the only practical thing he could do in the scenario. He could have tried escaping, attempting to destroy the weapon, or even trying to fight the guy with it. But that's all besides the point. He chose to follow through with a sacrificial ritual that was to bind the evil deity to the person who has the sword, right? So this god is now in the head of the PC, who despite his good intentions is no match for the power of a freaking deity of ANY kind. Thus he is overwhelmed and basically possessed by it. Mechanically it could function similarly to the way an intelligent item does. I'm not suggesting the character be changed to have evil alignment. Oh no. I'm suggesting his soul is slowly consumed by the incarnation of evil and eventually ceases to exist. It's not really a new harm clause if the exact effects of the release weren't very clear to begin with.

And the answer to your last question is "many". In my experience there is always at least one player at the table who enjoys playing that type of character.

[Karl Aegis]

If your players are not immediately buried in outsiders you've lost any opportunity you could have to use anything with the (extraplanar) subtype in this setting. This is the exact situation where mass plane shifts happen and you get buried in agents of (law) agents of (good) and agents of this god. If they don't, that means the only way to get to this setting from other planes is to transform yourself into a weapon and hope someone binds you to them. Even then, you would probably only send an aspect of yourself to that world rather than your real self because limiting your influence to only a single planet is really dumb.

[atemu1234]

Can we get some detail on the blade? This sounds like the kind of psuedo-anime story I can help with. If you want help with the god stats, I'd do it for free. As to the weapon... have you heard of Symbionts, from Eberron?

[HolyCouncilMagi]

Okay, I was probably jumping the gun even considering making him Neutral. (Though that wasn't a sure thing anyway.) If things had gone according to his expectations, she'd have felt a lot of pain and permanently lost some CON in exchange for the world being in a much better state, so the facts not aligning with his expectations doesn't really put him at fault that much.

As for what you guys have been saying... I'm liking the idea of a custom legacy weapon without the penalties. Maybe it will have a gradual "evilness" buildup as the deity tempts him to become more Evil and devoted to the sword's power... Like, rather than the first ritual being to go destroy more innocent souls, he might have to do some significant but partially justifiable amount of Evil, then an amount that pretty much makes him Neutral unless he's an absolute paragon of good in every other way, and on from there. Thoughts to be kept in mind, at least.

I definitely agree that I'm going to be upfront with the player about whatever I do, rather than trying to sneakily maneuver with it, but that doesn't mean I don't want whatever happens to actually be sensible and fair given the circumstances.

While him becoming a completely dominated vessel for the god (and thus another potential BBEG) is an interesting idea that I might try with a different group of players, I don't feel it would do my current group justice to take their characters away for rolling well and making hard choices. I could certainly see giving him other significant difficulties for it, though.

The thing about the sword sealing the god and the ritual being to break the balance in power is actually quite fun, and lends itself to an interesting potential progression, as the weapon might be able to lend more of its power to you the more you enable it to dominate the other force... I may very well actually incorporate this. Thanks for the neat idea, Bronk!

And thanks for all the suggestions from everyone!

[marphod]

The choice wasn't exactly questionable given the knowledge he had at the time.

Plot aside, I can't see how this isn't an evil act.

He took the life of an innocent. Full Stop.

That Manslaughter at best, and Murder at worst. There are Extenuating Circumstances; it was a better moral choice than other options, but it wasn't capital-G Good.

1) Just because a character has access to bringing back the dead doesn't make killing an innocent a neutral act. To wit, the SRD:

Good characters and creatures protect innocent life. Evil characters and creatures debase or destroy innocent life, whether for fun or profit.

"Good" implies altruism, respect for life, and a concern for the dignity of sentient beings. Good characters make personal sacrifices to help others.

2) Just because the dead CAN be raised doesn't mean that it will make it up to the dead party, or the dead party will want to come back.

{T}he subject’s soul must be free and willing to return. If the subject’s soul is not willing to return, the spell does not work ... . Coming back from the dead is an ordeal.
(Raise Dead)

3) Killing someone in a ritual strikes me as a likely situation for when a soul is not going to be free to return, even if it is not destroyed. In which case, even a True Res is unlikely to work. At best, that's a planar quest to free the soul first.

4) The character didn't say they wanted to True Res the sacrificed party; at least that wasn't the story presented. According to the OP, the character wanted to 'Raise Dead' the sacrificed party. That is a very different level of resources (5k-8kgp) than True Res (25k-30kgp).

In order for a simple system of Alignments like D&D to work, there are moral absolutes. Whether a character can make atonement or not, doing a wrong onto another is an evil act. This isn't one that is necessarily unrecoverable, but it is an Evil act.

IF the sacrificed party knew the Character's intent, and agreed to them, that might change the situation. Maybe. As it is? Evil act. Paladins would fall, clerics of good gods would be in deep [trouble], and this character's alignment should change.

(Quite frankly, I was expecting the 'Good' character to sacrifice themselves, telling the Good Guy (or the would-be sacrifice) to take the weapon and run. That would be a Good, possibly an Exalted, act.)

[XionUnborn01]

I'm throwing my hat in with the supporters of an alignment shift.

He had at least three choices:

1. Finish the sacrifice;
2. Attack the BBEG with the sword;
3. Run with/ throw the weapon.

He had two options that didn't involve killing an innocent person but chose to do it. Yes, it's not the most evil thing and even if he did plan to Raise Dead her later, he still killed her. Yes, he didn't know if options 2 or 3 would work, but he didn't know what would happen with 1 either. He didn't even know if there was anything else he needed to do to finish the sacrifice like a chant or some item he needed or anything like that.

[Venger]

I'm throwing my hat in with the supporters of an alignment shift.

He had at least three choices:

1. Finish the sacrifice;
2. Attack the BBEG with the sword;
3. Run with/ throw the weapon.

He had two options that didn't involve killing an innocent person but chose to do it. Yes, it's not the most evil thing and even if he did plan to Raise Dead her later, he still killed her. Yes, he didn't know if options 2 or 3 would work, but he didn't know what would happen with 1 either. He didn't even know if there was anything else he needed to do to finish the sacrifice like a chant or some item he needed or anything like that.

that's unreasonable, as OP has already agreed. moral judgements in D&D are made by your intentions, not your outcome. he didn't have any reason to think he couldn't just rez her, so it's not like he did anything wrong. killing people is not a big deal in D&D like it is in real life. it's not like she had any class levels to worry about.

[XionUnborn01]

that's unreasonable, as OP has already agreed. moral judgements in D&D are made by your intentions, not your outcome. he didn't have any reason to think he couldn't just rez her, so it's not like he did anything wrong. killing people is not a big deal in D&D like it is in real life. it's not like she had any class levels to worry about. Emphasis mine.

I really don't get what that means. Killing is evil. This PC decided that the best course of action was to kill an innocent to try and control an evil god himself. I think it's an interesting choice from a RP perspective but using the D&D morality system he performed some serious evil.

[ComaVision]

Beating the dead horse aside, send them on a quest to destroy the evil relic sword. If he wields it, have it start whispering to him. As the whispers get more frequent and intense, have him make an easy Will save. If he doesn't get the idea, keep upping the DC on the Will save and eventually he'll turn EVIL.

If you're forgiving, maybe make it so if the party can disarm him after he's turned evil then he'll be OK again. Impresses importance and doesn't feel like a cop out.

EDIT: Maybe when he's attacking an enemy adjacent to an ally with it, he has to make a Will save or he hits his ally instead. You need to make the sword unappealing to use.

[ryu]

Plot aside, I can't see how this isn't an evil act.

He took the life of an innocent. Full Stop.

That Manslaughter at best, and Murder at worst. There are Extenuating Circumstances; it was a better moral choice than other options, but it wasn't capital-G Good.

1) Just because a character has access to bringing back the dead doesn't make killing an innocent a neutral act. To wit, the SRD:


2) Just because the dead CAN be raised doesn't mean that it will make it up to the dead party, or the dead party will want to come back.

(Raise Dead)

3) Killing someone in a ritual strikes me as a likely situation for when a soul is not going to be free to return, even if it is not destroyed. In which case, even a True Res is unlikely to work. At best, that's a planar quest to free the soul first.

4) The character didn't say they wanted to True Res the sacrificed party; at least that wasn't the story presented. According to the OP, the character wanted to 'Raise Dead' the sacrificed party. That is a very different level of resources (5k-8kgp) than True Res (25k-30kgp).

In order for a simple system of Alignments like D&D to work, there are moral absolutes. Whether a character can make atonement or not, doing a wrong onto another is an evil act. This isn't one that is necessarily unrecoverable, but it is an Evil act.

IF the sacrificed party knew the Character's intent, and agreed to them, that might change the situation. Maybe. As it is? Evil act. Paladins would fall, clerics of good gods would be in deep [trouble], and this character's alignment should change.

(Quite frankly, I was expecting the 'Good' character to sacrifice themselves, telling the Good Guy (or the would-be sacrifice) to take the weapon and run. That would be a Good, possibly an Exalted, act.)

The basic flaw in your argument stems from a few severe premise errors. Namely that the ''simple'' alignment system of 3.5 functioned to begin with, that the word simple should ever be together with anything relating to moral outlook in the same sentence, that utilitarianism is an extremely real moral outlook you completely overlook, and that utilitarianism is a much stronger position when you can bring back the dead and actually intend to do so. Further literally any moral judgment that doesn't even take into account the knowledge of the actor isn't worth the time of day in any remotely reasonable society.

[Venger]

Emphasis mine.

I really don't get what that means. Killing is evil. This PC decided that the best course of action was to kill an innocent to try and control an evil god himself. I think it's an interesting choice from a RP perspective but using the D&D morality system he performed some serious evil.

you don't understand what it means? I'll rephrase.

in D&D, your intentions are what matter, not the outcome of the situation. you are judged by the universe based on what you meant to do instead of what you actually did.

if you give someone a scroll to heal their wounds and think it's a healing spell, but actually it's a bomb or something, you do not instantly fall when they are hurt because you didn't do it on purpose.

killing is totally not Evil in D&D, as long as you target the "right" races with it (read: the ones that don't look like you)
(insert mandatory Good is evil and Evil is Good discussion here)

you would have a point if death in D&D was anything more than a mild inconvenience. if it was permanent, I'd agree with you, but it's not, so what you're saying doesn't make any sense.

[HolyCouncilMagi]

(Quite frankly, I was expecting the 'Good' character to sacrifice themselves, telling the Good Guy (or the would-be sacrifice) to take the weapon and run. That would be a Good, possibly an Exalted, act.)

Did I give the impression that sacrificing anyone other than the intended victim would clearly work? I didn't mean to. The PCs were given no reason to believe that the sacrifice of anyone other than that particular girl would do the trick. That doesn't change the morality of sacrificing her in the first place, but it does make self-sacrifice an unreasonable option.

As for where I stand on the morality, after considering everybody's points, I do think it was majorly non-Good, but I think it was just shy of necessitating an alignment shift by itself. Now, how his character reacts to finding out that he can not, in fact, revive her from the dead will say a lot about his true morality, and of course I'll continue to judge him based off his actions going forward.

Anyway, the morality bit is rather tangential to what I need here. I'm mostly just trying to keep things fair from a party balance perspective without blatantly BSing him out of what he did. I can always talk to him about a retcon, but if he's interested in pursuing the plots that come from having the evil godsword, I hardly want to deny him the fun. (Plus, I think the rest of the party members will enjoy the addition, though admittedly that's just a hunch for now.)

[Venger]

Did I give the impression that sacrificing anyone other than the intended victim would clearly work? I didn't mean to. The PCs were given no reason to believe that the sacrifice of anyone other than that particular girl would do the trick. That doesn't change the morality of sacrificing her in the first place, but it does make self-sacrifice an unreasonable option.

No, not at all. I certainly wouldn't have drawn that conclusion from the info you gave.


As for where I stand on the morality, after considering everybody's points, I do think it was majorly non-Good, but I think it was just shy of necessitating an alignment shift by itself. Now, how his character reacts to finding out that he can not, in fact, revive her from the dead will say a lot about his true morality, and of course I'll continue to judge him based off his actions going forward.
I disagree on the first point, but agree on the second.

yeah, not bringing alignment down to individual piddling decisions is a good call.

sounds like a fun plotline. tell us how it goes.

[Telok]

Evil god sword trying to break it's bonds. Eats or destroys souls. Grows on power so as not to unbalance the game or immedately turn to pc into a npc.

+2 sword of cursed beserking. Keen and a x5 crit multiplier. Everyone killed with the sword is now soul-eaten by the sword.
Keep track the xp of what the sword kills, the sword gets that much xp. When the sword gets enough xp to gain an ability it becomes an intelligent weapon. As it continues to gain xp it keeps adding abilities and gaining ego. Every time it wins an ego battle it starts a fight. The pc will have to find a way to destroy it before it becomes powerful enough to take over. If the sword takes over the character becomes an npc and tries to enact the final ritual to free the god.

The "curse" will have to be more than a simple remove curse or break enchantment spell can deal with. Soul sucking god-sword artifacts shouldn't be countered by a 3rd level spell in common use.

Also, completing the evil ritual that you are supposed to stop is never a good thing.

[Xuldarinar]

1. What should be done about the MacGuffin: Im all for the suggestions that essentially require rituals to scale up the weapon. To me, at least, it makes the most sense.

2. Was what was done evil? Lets draw from a book. I'll give a quote I have used before.



ENDS AND MEANS
When do good ends justify evil means to achieve them? Is it morally acceptable, for example, to torture an evil captive in order to extract vital information that can prevent the deaths of thousands of innocents? Any good character shudders at the thought of committing torture, but the goal of preventing thousands of deaths is undeniably a virtuous one, and a neutral character might easily consider the use of torture in such a circumstance. With evil acts on a smaller scale, even the most virtuous characters can find themselves tempted to agree that a very good end justifies a mildly evil means. Is it acceptable to tell a small lie in order to prevent a minor catastrophe? A large catastrophe? A world-shattering catastrophe?

In the D&D universe, the fundamental answer is no, an evil act is an evil act no matter what good result it may achieve. A paladin who knowingly commits an evil act in pursuit of any end no matter how good still jeopardizes her paladinhood. Any exalted character risks losing exalted feats or other benefits of celestial favor if he commits any act of evil for any reason. Whether or not good ends can justify evil means, they certainly cannot make evil means any less evil.


Unless I'm misreading, he completed an evil ritual (killing an innocent in the process) in order to thwart evil. Evil act, period.

[SowZ]

1. What should be done about the MacGuffin: Im all for the suggestions that essentially require rituals to scale up the weapon. To me, at least, it makes the most sense.

2. Was what was done evil? Lets draw from a book. I'll give a quote I have used before.



Unless I'm misreading, he completed an evil ritual (killing an innocent in the process) in order to thwart evil. Evil act, period.

Yes, it was an evil act. But an evil act committed under duress, in the heat of the moment, with good intentions is not enough to cause an alignment shift. This guy isn't a Paladin, I don't think. Just a guy in a lose-lose situation trying to do the right thing. So he screwed up and made a pretty poor judgement call. This does not make him a bad person.

Let him keep the sword and his good alignment. Yes, the story is going to totally change directions based on what you planned. This is fine. This is actually good. I've DMed some long campaigns. The ones where the things I plotted occurred as I expected and the typical story structure, (Pinch Points, Midpoints, Climax, etc.) was followed with a big boss battle at the end were 'Okay.' The most successful campaign I've ever run, where three years later the players still talk about it almost weekly, was nothing of the sort.

I think I had a pretty interesting story with a lot of political intrigue, several well developed NPCs with conflicting goals, and players at the center of it all trying to stop a secret government organization from accidentally destroying the world. (It was a supers game. The government had developed a way to basically strip everyone in the world of their superpowers at once with a super machine. They did not know that the machine had a slight chance of not removing the powers, but increase them a hundred fold and make the person an insane monster.) The players gradually learned the stakes and made their plays accordingly. Player backstory was always important and each character had personal motivations as well as a reason to be in the party, but for the first half of the campaign it worked out pretty much as I'd predicted with some moderate surprises, (a stint in an alternate timeline where the party had failed was the result of a clever ploy on behalf of the Time-Power party leader. I hadn't expected that, but it gave me a great opportunity to drop some exposition.) But nothing happened that drastically changed the direction of the plot.

Then, based entirely on player decisions and plot twists that resulted in each PCs motives and backstories coming to light, the party leader ended up becoming one of the uber -owered monster supers. (I had talked to the player out of game, it was his idea actually and he was excited about what it could do to the story, I didn't steal his PC.) And the whole campaign shifted. Former enemies became friends at it was all a race to stop and kill their old friend before he could end the timeline, (he was the a time-power dude and capable of such a feat now. There were more complex motives for why he wanted to do this than, "Rawr, I'm Chaotic Evil now!" but I won't go into that.) From this point on, I rarely planned more than one session ahead. I couldn't it was just too player driven and everything went crazy with status quotes, allegiances, etc. changing every session. It was wonderful and the players were excited to play every week. Not because I was a great storyteller, but because the story was writing itself and I let big crazy stuff happen.

So, all this to say, here is my advice: Talk to the player. Give the sword crazy stats so it is too tempting to pass up. Hint to the player that the consequences of using the sword might be dire, but it could be a very cool direction for the story if he is willing to commit to that. As the player kills bad guys with the sword, it gets stronger but give hints that something weird is happening. Then, after a couple sessions, (he shouldn't have this long term if it so powerful,) the people killed by the sword and the aforementioned ritual awakens the dark god and the sword becomes alive. No more OP weapon, and now there is a new BBEG boss and a new goal that was player driven and a result of player actions.

Let the Good PC remain good, but wracked with guilt over what he has inadvertently done. Most likely the party will feel responsible for stopping the demon-god themselves since it was their fault, and now the stakes are raised and you don't have to bait the PCs into following the story with bait and stick. They will chase the story themselves, probably, and are adding a significant amount to the plot.

Anyway, that is what I would do. Other DMs have different philosophies that are just as valid, but I figured I'd throw in my 2cp.

[prufock]

I'm going to ask an obvious question: what was the ritual intended to do? If the villain had completed it successfully, what mechanical and roleplaying benefits would he have gained?

Also, for which god was the sacrifice performed?

[Taelas]

I wouldn't change his alignment. I would tell him that it was a significant evil act that could easily lead to a change later if the character isn't careful, though.

As for the weapon... it's sentient, I presume? Make it an intelligent item, but on crack. Have it restrict its powets significantly, since it doesn't really want to be used for good, then influence his actions. Corrupt him.

[Tohsaka Rin]

Emphasis mine.

I really don't get what that means. Killing is evil. This PC decided that the best course of action was to kill an innocent to try and control an evil god himself. I think it's an interesting choice from a RP perspective but using the D&D morality system he performed some serious evil.

You must run a lot of non-combat campaigns then.

That aside (talking to the thread here now), trying to run wouldn't work. Move action to get over, move action to pick up the girl. TWO targets right in easy sacrificing range.

Kill the girl? Doom cometh.

Try and kill the bad guy? Perhaps doom still cometh.

Try and take the thing and run? There are spells for bringing stuff to you. There's teleport impeding spells, preventing his escape, potentially. Trying to run is just as likely to get him a hold-person square in the back.

From my point of view, nearly every other option the player could have taken would have led to bad, bad things. Shanking the girl was, I think, the ONLY 100% chance there was of, if not succeeding, at least preventing the bad guy from succeeding.

Think about it. He can't unwillingly bring the girl back to life, as due to how rez spells work, she can refuse. Can't perform the sacrifice if the hero has already done it.

On the flipside, as far as the player knew, he was just a few grand away from bringing her back, and making a reeeaaaaly big apology.

90% of the time, death is as meaningful in DnD as it is in DBZ. You're literally hanging around, waiting to be brought back, or just enjoying your just rewards in the afterlife of your choice.

There's no consequences for the dead people.

At all.

[LeSwordfish]

For what it's worth, performing the sacrifice himself shows a level of lateral thinking and narrative skill i'd love to see in any player. While of course it can't go all well for him, I would at very least discuss OOC with the player before slapping him in the alignment.

[Segev]

Two possible approaches regarding "temptation" occur to me:

1) The god pretends to be/have the dead girl's soul, and uses that as a sock puppet to offer "advice" that gradually leads to evil.

2) The god reveals what he's REALLY done by killing her (i.e. destroyed her soul), and uses that conflated with the reasons for killing her when he DID NOT know better as a reason to willingly do something similar for the greater good again. This time knowing the price, but hopefully deceived by a "you've done it once already; are you going to waste that sacrifice by refusing to do what's necessary now?" style of argument.


If he seems eager and willing to use its power, let him, at least at first, with few to no strings attached. See how he uses it. Then, have it start making...suggestions, requests, and demands. Have it refuse to help him with something "stupid," like a totally selfless act. "Maybe YOU don't mind working for nothing, but I want something." Start off, maybe, with an expensive sword polish that might be willingly given by a grateful rescuee, but which is still a bit of a hardship for them to give up. Later, have it pretend to be his friend, and be "looking out for him" by refusing to help unless he gets something for himself out of it.


If he seems reluctant to use its power, have it suggest how much easier things would be if he'd just use it. Then follow the above pattern if he gets used to using it.

[Flickerdart]

If there's a god in the blade, make it an intelligent item with a huge Ego score. Have it refuse to be wielded by the character except in circumstances that match its (probably evil) agenda.

[RolkFlameraven]

The BEG was going to bind the god into himself right? The PC used the BEG's own sword to kill the girl right?

This sounds like there was more then one ritual that happened here, and... well the PC just let the BEG turn into the BBEG by DOING THE BEG'S JOB AND KILLING THE GIRL!

There had to be something about the BEG that made the god go into his body and be 'bound' after all right? Killing the girl would be the last step in it. If the PC has killed the girl with his OWN weapon he would have been fine, but he didn't. He completed the act, released the god and the BEG starts laughing as he in transformed into a god before the PC's eyes. Not only that, but as he is changing the new BBEG mockingly tells the PC that not only has he helped him become what he was going for all along, but he DESTORYED that poor girls soul in the doing.

Then let the PC go, he is no longer a threat and he has to deal with the ramifications of what he has done, but drop a hint about what the new BBEG's plans are. And let the RP happen.

[P.F.]

Debating the morality of human sacrifice

I don't see the dilemma here. From the SRD, "'Evil' implies hurting, oppressing, and killing others. Some evil creatures simply have no compassion for others and kill without qualms if doing so is convenient ... People who are neutral with respect to good and evil have compunctions against killing." Killing, or even assaulting, an innocent person in the service of an evil god, is evil. Even if you plan to apologize later.

However, the same source notes, "few people are completely consistent," so I would have to agree with

I wouldn't change his alignment. I would tell him that it was a significant evil act that could easily lead to a change later if the character isn't careful, though.

As for the weapon... it's sentient, I presume? Make it an intelligent item, but on crack. Have it restrict its powets significantly, since it doesn't really want to be used for good, then influence his actions. Corrupt him.

And,


If there's a god in the blade, make it an intelligent item with a huge Ego score. Have it refuse to be wielded by the character except in circumstances that match its (probably evil) agenda.

Probably what I would do as well. Powerful intelligent items are often more trouble than they're worth. Let him struggle with it for a while as this nascent god's cult comes calling to retrieve it (I'm guessing that's where the plot arc is headed regardless, so it shouldn't change much in that respect). Once he figures out that Bad Things happen when he tries to use the weapon, he'll either lock it in a lead chest until it can be safely destroyed, or kill himself trying to control it.

[HolyCouncilMagi]

The BEG was going to bind the god into himself right? The PC used the BEG's own sword to kill the girl right?

This sounds like there was more then one ritual that happened here, and... well the PC just let the BEG turn into the BBEG by DOING THE BEG'S JOB AND KILLING THE GIRL!

There had to be something about the BEG that made the god go into his body and be 'bound' after all right? Killing the girl would be the last step in it. If the PC has killed the girl with his OWN weapon he would have been fine, but he didn't. He completed the act, released the god and the BEG starts laughing as he in transformed into a god before the PC's eyes. Not only that, but as he is changing the new BBEG mockingly tells the PC that not only has he helped him become what he was going for all along, but he DESTORYED that poor girls soul in the doing.

Then let the PC go, he is no longer a threat and he has to deal with the ramifications of what he has done, but drop a hint about what the new BBEG's plans are. And let the RP happen.

Not only would this be totally hamfisted, it would also be entirely inconsistent with what's been established. The god was in the particular sword the PC made him drop when he stunned him, not just floating around waiting to occupy whatever sword sacrificed the girl, and the human world's laws of ownership and theft are hardly a slumbering evil god's concern; it binds itself to whoever performs the sacrifice.

(Incidentally, that means just gutting the girl with his regular sword was an option too, but if he intended to bring her back after a successful god-awakening ritual, I don't think he figured they'd have much trouble after a regular death rezzing the girl themselves and doing it over.)

[RolkFlameraven]

Not only would this be totally hamfisted, it would also be entirely inconsistent with what's been established. The god was in the particular sword the PC made him drop when he stunned him, not just floating around waiting to occupy whatever sword sacrificed the girl, and the human world's laws of ownership and theft are hardly a slumbering evil god's concern; it binds itself to whoever performs the sacrifice.

(Incidentally, that means just gutting the girl with his regular sword was an option too, but if he intended to bring her back after a successful god-awakening ritual, I don't think he figured they'd have much trouble after a regular death rezzing the girl themselves and doing it over.)

I'm not sure I understand. From what I read had the PC use his own blade then nothing would have happened, but because he used the BEG's it let the god out/powered it or some such, that is what I said.


sacrifice at the shrine on the peak in order to awaken and bind to himself a god sealed within an organic blade.

Instead, thinking he wouldn't have time to both pick up the girl and get away, he picks up the bad guy's god-sword and performs the sacrifice himself, hoping to foil the bad guy's plan by binding the newly-awakened god to himself...

So I basically left the session off with a big gout of darkness rising out of the new corpse to consume the character. Dramatic enough, but definitely nothing I was even close to prepared for.

So unless the only thing needed was to kill that girl at that time with that sword and nothing else to bind the god, yes it would be ham-fisted I guess. But if took anything else, any other steps to bind that god it either goes to the BBEG, both of them or is freed and they now have a, presumably, evil godling running around.

The BBEG getting the power upgrade because of the PC killing a girl by stupidly using that sword, and seemingly TRYING to get an (presumably) evil god attached to his soul fits as far as I can tell. But so too could the BEG getting his upgrade as well as the PC getting an evil sword as the god is split between the two. Either way there is lovely RP fodder here.

[josh13905]

Perhaps I missed something but you plan on picking up immediately after the sacrifice was made (albeit by the player not the BEG).

So you have the player with the ultra sword, and the dead girl, AND the BEG (Albeit no sword)

Why not have the BEG's ritual have failed due to the players actions, then have the BEG react? If he's as powerful as I imagine him to be, does he have some sort of way he can act to reclaim his weapon?

Even if it takes a bit of fudging to re-orient the BEG into someone who has some sort of action to stun the player in turn and get his weapon back? My personal thought is that one of the most important things you have to do is make sure the player feels as though he is being rewarded, and not punished. So you really would have to make the benefits of the failed sacrifice known, because it would suck to be a player who does something that is unexpected successful then have it backfire because it wasn't according to the standard storyline.