Creating a situation requiring party sacrifice... with a paladin in the party

[AnonymousPepper]

Let's say you as a GM were writing up a scenario that... let's not say require, because I hate railroading as much as the next person, but would be much eased by a member of the party sacrificing themselves. It makes sense in story, it's justified by events that have previously occurred and established details about the situation that make it sensible for sacrifice to be, if not outright required, extremely helpful.

But there's a problem. There's a paladin in the party. A very good, very well-played, and very well-roleplayed paladin. It's an absolutely foregone conclusion that the paladin will sacrifice himself for just about every reason in the book. Frankly, that's overdone, it's uninteresting, and honestly it's just so... expected. But you know full well that that's what'd happen if you go down that route.

How would you, as a GM, attempt to prevent him from doing so, without being too heavy-handed about it? Require the willing sacrifice of an equally-evil creature maybe? Simply knock him out? Or maybe take an out-of-game approach, at the risk of spoiling the plot?

...I'm stumped on this because it's a route I'd like to go down, to see what my players would do. I'd like to see how the paladin would react to being unable to do this, and I'd like to see who would step up out of the rest of the party - if anybody, as they might opt to try and think their way out and maybe come up with a third option and have a Really Bad Time for the chance to avoid it period.

The specific scenario in question would be sealing an interplanar breach that was opened with a massive blood sacrifice of innocents by a vengeful cleric, if that helps ideas any. The party's in the middle of an invasion aimed at taking the area of the breach back and sealing it off that they've been preparing for for months.

[icefractal]

I guess the question would be what makes the other character in question more suitable than the Paladin? It's possible that a ritual could require a voluntary non-good sacrifice ... although a non-good character would be less likely to volunteer for such.

Other question - what does sacrifice mean in this case?
A) Ok, sacrifice complete ... Revivify! Right, sorted.
B) We'll need to get some help to get Bob raised, might be a couple sessions.
C) We might be able to get him raised, but it will be a whole quest and take a while.
D) Not coming back by any method.

Assuming it's C or D - how do your players feel about changing characters? Because setting up a situation like this is, in a way, death by DM fiat - interesting if people are on board, may lead to discord otherwise.

[Geddy2112]

I would generally avoid a "somebody must be sacrificed" situation as a DM. As a player(and most players I know) don't see retreat or sacrificing a party member as an option. Many players and Pc's are made of a stubborn resolve that means either the party wins together or dies together. Exceptions exist of course; I played in a campaign where the party was a bunch of prisoners who bailed out of jail and were all some form of monster. We worked together knowing that in the end it would be a "curse your sudden but inevitable betrayal" thing. And in those kind of games where everyone is on board, having the option to sacrifice another player(not them choosing to sacrifice themselves) is awesome.

So first off, don't present a no win situation to the party. Make sure there are multiple ways out other than "one of you is gonna have to kick the bucket". Sure sacrifice might be an easy option, but there are others. Also, I shy against robbing the agency of a player- not allowing your paladin player to have any say is effectively robbing them of the game experience. You could of course use magic mind control, but that is usually fairly ham fisted.

Second, provide equal or greater reasons for the paladin(or anyone else in the party) to not sacrifice themselves for. Unless they are incredibly bleeding heart, most good aligned people won't be looking for grenades to jump on,but instead living a life of meaningful change. In a no time to think scenario self sacrifice is a bit more common,but if there is time to think out other options, the players probably have reasons to live and know they can continue to do good while they are alive. If the scenario is that which their not sacrificing themselves will cause more harm than good, then it is going into no win territory. Maybe this will be a setback, but they know they can take greater steps later on to do more good and continue doing good. They know this is not the last portal,or there will be more,or this won't be a forever solution etc.

Third is to provide reasons not to die- the stick vs the carrot of a reason to live. Maybe if the party loses a member, they will have to fight and possibly lose against thing X. Maybe there is a failsafe where the ability to sacrifice is available to any one surviving member, but they can take multiple options to avoid death.

[AnonymousPepper]

Character death is a thing that the group's always been okay with, but hasn't happened in a while.
This would be permanent, though. There's artifacts in play around here (mythal-level stuff), so there's been a bit of handwavium of the magical variety about resurrection magic in general the past... out-of-game month or so.

But don't worry, I'm no fool, I wouldn't ever present a scenario where it was the only option. One of my players GMed for me once and we hashed out just how bad getting railroaded is. But I'm *not* above presenting a scenario where it might be the best or by far easiest option.

This paladin, by the way, to address your thing about self-sacrificing to an extreme and what not... self-admittedly has a strong martyr complex. There was once a wish used in a misguided attempt to bring back a party member that had died a permadeath to Acererak's demilich construct in the Tomb of Horrors, and the paladin insisted on wording the wish in such a way that any consequences of the wish, which is obviously well above Wish's explicit powers (as a matter of fact, a direct violation of the rules, but the party was kinda desperate, and seeing this, I let them do it, but definitely made sure there were consequences) and thus falls wayyyyyyyyy into "here be dragons" territory, would fall back on him and nobody else. (This did not work, because the wish was cast off that handy dandy gem of cursed wishing that they found in the tomb, but that's entirely beside the point... unless you count it probably strengthening said martyr complex.) The in-character argument versus "we need you alive" took about a real-time half hour.

The party comp is him, a CG swash, a LN wizard, a LE warder, and a NE artificer.

[Larrx]

Is there any reason the sacrifice has to be death specifically? Maybe the sacrificed guy has to jump thorough the portal, gaining in the process some template that gave them the [evil] subtype, and spending the rest of their days as an npc causing havoc on the other plane. A player still has to permanently lose their character, but the pally might not be down with becoming an evil outsider.

[Chronos]

So, you want to set up a situation where a player who roleplays well will be singled out to be punished for that good roleplay.

I think that makes clear my opinion of the situation.

[Shackel]

I have the strangest feeling that he's not asking for whether or not his scenario is "acceptable" by the standards of someone who isn't in his campaign.

I would say to try and find something else that also might require the paladin's attention. Deity pleading with him not to might be something interesting and fitting for the stakes, and even if the paladin does sacrifice himself as is most likely to happen, would give good internal conflict in the situation(his perceived duty as a martyr and his duty as a paladin to his god).

[DarkSoul]

Why not let him do it? It's what he thinks the character would do, and to be honest if he's willing to give up a character he likes playing then why deprive him of it?

That being said, if you really don't want him to do it look through the Book of Exalted Deeds. There's a section in there about how sacrificing oneself like that isn't as good a deed as some might think and in fact is cause for an exalted character to lose their exalted status (if I remember the passage correctly).

[icefractal]

Are you aiming for a specific other character to be the one sacrificed, or should it be "anybody except the Paladin"? Because it'd be a lot easier to do the former - for instance, if the sacrifice involved disassembling the portal's dweomer while inside it, the Artificer might be the only one capable - but the latter is trickier to justify. Although one way would be for some action to be required from outside the portal that only the Paladin can do - for example, someone jumps in and destabilizes it, and then the Paladin has to channel divine energy in from outside to finish the job.

However, would it be that bad if the Paladin was the one to sacrifice himself? It sounds like the player would want that, and might even feel cheated if it fell to someone else. Sure, it's a cliche, but cliche's can still be entertaining when you're directly playing them.

[endur]

Game Over by dm fiat.

Seriously, this is a good scenario for the end of the campaign.

[Zanos]

However, would it be that bad if the Paladin was the one to sacrifice himself? It sounds like the player would want that, and might even feel cheated if it fell to someone else. Sure, it's a cliche, but cliche's can still be entertaining when you're directly playing them.
I agree with this. If someone made a character that loves to jump on grenades, why not let them jump on a big grenade?

[Denver]

So, you want to set up a situation where a player who roleplays well will be singled out to be punished for that good roleplay.

I think that makes clear my opinion of the situation.

I think, under most contextual readings of the OP's post, he wants to set up a scenario that may have some of your first clause ("a player who roleplays well will be singled out") but is trying to find a solution to the problem stated in your second clause ("punished for that good roleplay").

Were you unable to discern the goal of the OP?

[theNater]

As the breach was opened through divine magic, it must also be closed through divine magic. Since the paladin is the only divine caster in the party, he's the only one who can manage the necessary life energies after they've been made available by the completion of the sacrifice.

[Ashtagon]

This sounds a lot like the plot of the (very) old adventure Irilian, even down to it having a paladin in the expected party. Of course, that was written as an (extended) one-shot.

Bear in mind this sacrifice is fully in-keeping with a paladin's expected role and quite a few paladin tropes. The player might be upset if not allowed to take this action.

You could let the player take up the role of a handy NPC as a new character to play.

You could have the PC's deity bring the paladin back with a level of risen martyr (but house rule that capstone away).

You could have a convenient NPC turn up to sacrifice himself. I wouldn't recommend this though, because the NPC will end up stealing the plot thunder.

[backwaterj]

You could have the PC's deity bring the paladin back with a level of risen martyr (but house rule that capstone away).
I'd go with something along these lines. You don't want to punish the player, but you don't want to steal his roleplaying thunder either. Let him sacrifice himself, though no mortal magic can help him.

...God I love deus ex machina! :smallbiggrin:

[draxsiss]

Give the players the thought process that the sacrifice MAY not work (random roll) and also point out that maybe characters of chaotic or evil alignments are more effective willing sacrifices. This way your paladin will not jump if he thinks he has only a small chance of it working (but still could!), and if OTHER party members think their shot is far greater. If PC's are smart they can also sometimes find npcs to charm/dominate/diplomacy/bribe in to sacrificing themselves FOR you. Point out to the paladin that after the sacrifice is done that large amount of "evil energy " will be released and might effect he common people, they will need a charismatic good leader of the light to help temper them so that they will not fall to the path of darkness and temptation. Follow this up with a Demon/Devil with teleport without error who is going to "tempt people" could add a whole extra side quest line! Just some thoughts!

[Ryuuk]

Give the Paladin with a martyr complex another, equally important duty. Sure, he could sacrifice himself here, but that would mean leaving the other task unfinished. He needs to question whether sacrificing his life here would be for the best, as it would leave the other, heavier burden for someone lesser.

The way I see it, you win here if you can make the decision taken be all that meaningful. You have a wizard and an artificer too, they probably have good, knowledge checks in different areas. Why not give them different answers each with its own drawback?