PDA

View Full Version : How would you have handled this situation?



DrummingDM
2007-06-25, 02:16 PM
Either as a player, or a DM...


After a long, dangerous, harrowing trip through the crypt, the (mostly 4th & 5th level) party finally begins to realize they're heading back towards the surface after experiencing what can only be assumed is an earthquake, emanating from somewhere deep within the earth beneath their feet. The party cleric, a large, hulking half-orc, turns the corner and steps into the ruined doorway of a large-ish room with the following features:


one wall is ruined - formerly sporting a large archway leading out of the dungeon, it is now blocked by rubble, resultant from the recent earthquake
other three walls are largely barren, worked stone, one of which contains an iron door
the ceiling is approximately 12 feet high
smack dab in the center of the room is a very angry, very agitated, very trapped young copper dragon


Said party cleric sees said angry young dragon, and isn't quite ready to step into a room brimming with likely death, so he halts, attempts to keep the party behind him.

Party ranger decides he's bored with this "playing it safe" routine, and he shoves party cleric into the room with the dragon. This sudden involuntary movement on the cleric's part is interpreted badly by the already agitated dragon, and said dragon proceeds engage the cleric in melee. Roll iniative!

...

Party defeats dragon. Everyone is alive. Yay. But wait...what's this? Party cleric (worshipper of a deity of courage, valor, and order in combat) seems to have taken umbrage to being shoved into a room with a very angry, very deadly creature by the unseemly, impatient, rude little elf ranger. Party cleric's player has picked up a d20. He desires to lay the proverbial "smack" down on this rude, insipid little ranger, in the name of showing the elf how to respect his fellow party members.

Party DM (relatively inexperienced) and party Elf Ranger (complete newbie) panic. What should they do? How do we handle this? Answer? PRETEND IT NEVER HAPPENED.

Okay. Sorry for the Wall of Text. But I want to get fellow players and DM's opinions on this situation. In this case...I was the Half-Orc Cleric. I felt rightly...slighted for being shoved into the room. In the interest of being in character, I decided I'd instruct the elf on how to properly handle himself in future similar situations.

The DM was fairly inexperienced, so I can understand his panic ("I can't have my players fighting each other!") and the ranger was a complete newbie. This was his second session, I believe. So, in the interest of not abusing the newbie, and cutting him a little slack, I guess I can excuse my DM for just kind of glossing over the situation, and moving right along. But what really gets my goat, is that no one else at the table really wanted to address things after-the-fact.

If this ranger pulls something like that again, Bashir, Half-Orc Cleric of Hajama, God of Courage and Valor, WILL teach our little elven friend a lesson. But I don't want to scare this new player away from the table, either.

EagleWiz
2007-06-25, 02:21 PM
Well next trap you see (or likley traped hallway,crypt,etc) throw the elf at it.

crazedloon
2007-06-25, 02:27 PM
I personally would insist on the fight and roll your attack against a flat footed elf. However restrain from actual damage I would suggest grapple and or non-lethal damage. Once knocked out I would suggest an even party split of the loot from the offending encounter and then when the ranger "wakes" up explain to him why he was punished. This will get the rest of the party on your side as well as be a viable punishment for potentially killing you.

But then I am often considered an Ahole so you may want to ignore my advice.

bosssmiley
2007-06-25, 02:27 PM
Keep it non-lethal, but make it exemplary.

Have your character slowly and quietly make his case to the ranger while laying down his weapons and removing his armour, gently make sure the point gets across, and only then give the newbie's elf ranger the kind of bare-knuckle beating they write songs about. Just so he knows to never ever to pull a stunt like that again.

"You wanna *kick* push me through a door *thump* into a room *thump* with a dragon *atomic wedgie* in it, huh? *headbutt* You better thank Hajama his own holy self *thump, thump, thump, kick* I'm one of the good guys!" (clock cleaning continues offstage, other PCs make byplay and secure the area)

Hopefully the GM and the other players will get the idea and go along with it.

evisiron
2007-06-25, 02:29 PM
As a player: Fight it out with non lethal damage. Make the GM aware of this, as the fight will take place but things can go again pretty soon.

As the GM: let them fight it out or discuss it IC, but restrict to non lethal damage.

Damionte
2007-06-25, 02:39 PM
How would I handle it as a GM, or as a player?

Hmm as a player had I been the cleric he'd have got a tongue lashing, perhaps a punch in the mouth. Definately before I started healing though.


As the ranger, hmmm I'd have responded to a punch in the face in kind. A ranger vs cleric in close quarters with no weapons is an even fight. So I have just as much chance of winning that fist fight as he does.

Had I been the ranger in your situation where you're actually coming at me with your weapon I suppose it would be based on our relationship. If we were long friends then I'd just back away and let the others in theparty step between us. If you kept pushing the fight I'd just shoot you until you left me alone.

As a GM in the situation you described I'd have ignored you. or I would have glossed over how threatening you were and simply stated you were standing there fuming and being menacing. In this particular case you were in the wrong not him. Though he was a new player his reactions were pretty good for an in character move. By picking up your weapon and threatening to go lethal damage on him you crossed the line into unessesasry party conflict. Had you been going fists on him I'd have said roll initiative. You went lethal damage though and I wouldn't have that.

Now had you pushed the issue I'd have gone ahead and let you roll it out, or a mysterious random encounter may interupt the action. Probabyl another earthquack aftershock, to start bringing down the ceiling.

Diggorian
2007-06-25, 02:39 PM
As a player I've done something similar to what the half orc did, had to KO a LN wizard for acting too near LE for the likes of my CG ranger.

Bashing the elf once with nonlethal, getting him to promise not to do anything like that again, then healing him to show no hard feelings is what I'd do. I'm not a PvPer at all, but believe in PCs acting according to their nature.

From a DM perspective, I'm big on PC freedom according to their natures. If it resulted in lengthy bickering or escalated to a PC death, I'd leave it for the party to resolve.

JellyPooga
2007-06-25, 02:42 PM
As a player: Be very angry, punch the Elf in the face maybe, if my character's that angry, but not all combat has to end with one combatant dead or unconscious. A single blow shouldn't warrant much retaliation (let alone lethal retaliation), but will easily get your point across. But then again, as a devout follower of a deity who's portfolio includes 'order in combat', getting angry at someone might not be a justified reason to beat the crap out of them. As a player, I'd have to evaluate my characters devotion to his gods ideals and just how angry he really is...is he angry enough (especially after what I assume was a rather protracted fight in which said Elf and my own character probably had to work together to some extent) to ignore his beliefs over something that is essentialy a minor slight against my person. Is violent retribution the norm for this character? Does he often lose his temper? Is this a one off incident or has the Elf been niggling away at my temper for some time now? As a Cleric (especially of good deities as I assume this is), one often has to consider the implications of ones actions in relation to your deities ideals...either that or you do not deserve to be a Cleric of that deity.

As a DM: sit back and enjoy the show.

RandomNPC
2007-06-25, 02:49 PM
my group has two simmilar people, always trying to kill eachother. the slippers of spider climb technically belong to each of them due to the amount of time each has had them.... barbarian vs. wizard doesn't last long when the barbarian is right on top of the wizard.

but when the gargantuan (sp?) black dragon hit the group with a rope of entanglement, the barbarian died trying to carry the tied up wizard to safety.

im not saying it's going to be ok, or even that it is ok, because it's not. but sometimes when it comes down to it the group pulls together.

i sugest telling him all about how you didn't like your character being treated like that, and maybe go for non-leathal combat to teach him a lesson. i sugest sundering (or claiming) something he finds usefull. not his key weapon, or a major item, but something. cut his rope in half, burn up his oil, use his sunrods up. ya know what? take all his stuf outa his backpack, and use it to test for traps.

Tallis
2007-06-25, 04:01 PM
As the cleric I would have gone for non-lethal damage. Or maybe held back on healing him temporarily. Just long enough to get the point across, not to actully get him killed.
As DM I would let the group work things out among themselves, I'd only step in if things got out of hand OOC. Maybe send in a random encounter or maybe mediate an OOC discussion depending on the situation.

GoblinJTHM
2007-06-25, 04:11 PM
have a nigh impossible DC check for a puny elf shoving a half orc in such a way to move him more than a tiny sway.

bigbaddragon
2007-06-25, 04:32 PM
As a player: Yell at him, beat him up maybe, make him understand how stupid his actions were and make him understand that he endangered the whole party and especially you by bringing fight to all of you unprepared, and you had time to make at least some preparations, perhaps even get a surprise round.

As a DM a I would cut him on his experience for that session a little for his foolishness and I would let you beat him up but only by nonlethal means.

I believe in rewarding smart things PCs do and punishing stupid things they do, like getting someone other PC killed because of their own stupidity or selfishness .

goat
2007-06-25, 05:45 PM
I'd have taken the pay for raising the copper dragon out of their loot, and made him apologise, probably with a letter, so said dragon doesn't chew his face off.

The poor little thing probably had no idea what was going on.

The Valiant Turtle
2007-06-25, 06:29 PM
I was also wondering just how this Ranger shoved your character into a room. The closest there are to rules for that is a bull rush or Setting Sun maneuvers from Tome of Battle. Those may not really be appropriate to this situation but I wouldn't certainly let it just happen. At the very least there would have to be some sort of grapple or attack made to do this. You don't get to just say I shove your character into a room and it happens.

After the fact as a player: What do you think your character would do. Do that. In addition to the non-lethal or generally mean things recommended above I would endeavor to get the rest of the party to agree to censure him. The next time the party gets in the clear you force them to deal with it. You don't agree to go anywhere or heal anyone until it's been dealt with. Personally, I've seen TPK's result from behavior like that, so I don't take it likely. And if any of your characters have any real military or combat experience they know that too (except your characters don't refer to them as TPK's, they refer to them as military blunders or something similar).

As a GM: If the player says he's attacking another player I let them role the dice and do whatever they wish. I don't like it at all, but I don't dictate their actions.

I also suggest that you ask the GM to make any encounters like that in the future a bit deadlier. If this dragon was typical, a peaceful approach would have been very beneficial to both you and the dragon.

nerulean
2007-06-25, 06:39 PM
I too am always and by default on the side of the young copper dragon. More productively...

As a player and given the fact that the other player was so new, I would probably have announced something along the lines of 'I punch you in the face and berate you for your stupidity.' No attack roll required to hit, but no damage taken for making contact, either, just a sore jaw. Point made emphatically, no lasting implications.

As a DM, though, you should always remember that retroactively changing something is never the most satisfying solution to any situation.

psychoticbarber
2007-06-25, 06:53 PM
I too am always and by default on the side of the young copper dragon. More productively...

As a player and given the fact that the other player was so new, I would probably have announced something along the lines of 'I punch you in the face and berate you for your stupidity.' No attack roll required to hit, but no damage taken for making contact, either, just a sore jaw. Point made emphatically, no lasting implications.

As a DM, though, you should always remember that retroactively changing something is never the most satisfying solution to any situation.

Moved and seconded. This is essentially what I would have said, just putting my voice behind it too.

Social_Outcast
2007-06-25, 06:56 PM
A Grapple Check would go down well in this circumstance as a player:
Your bigger and naturally stronger (unless your rangers into his melee), pull your weight on the little git, either pin him against the wall by his throat untill he utters an apologie while gasping for air, or hold him down and slap him like a little girl. Either way, he can't do anything until you've driven your point home.

As a DM, I've encountered such a problem before, except my PCs were all as close to chaotic evil as you get and about level 12-14. I wouldn't recommend a fight unless you know what the outcome will be. I alowed a battle of Half-orc Barbarian vs Half-Elf Ranger (Ranged specialist) over an argument stemming from when the Ranger tried to sacrafice the Barbarian to a Lich for a free ticket out of a wizards tower. Genuinly thought one of the players was gonna have to re-roll, but my Half-Orc Friend reduced her to 2 hp after forcefully removing her limbs and called it a day at that - tossed her quickly dieing stump to the team cleric who just sighed and started Spontaneous casting. Those were the days...

-A

Neek
2007-06-25, 07:00 PM
You needed an encounter to break apart your party into a melee? The last campaign I was in ended with the fighter, myself (gnomish barbarian/sorcerer), and wizard ganging up on the Druid, then the Fighter and I laid waste to the Wizard. And the entire conflict started over just about nothing.

In this situation, I'd second the movements of non-lethal damage, or better yet, as suggestion--resolve it without dicerolls. Pretending it doesn't happen simply negates verisimilitude. If there is an "undo button," it's no longer much of a game--and it brews nothing but discontent from the players.

Matthew
2007-06-25, 07:07 PM
What would you be likely to do in real life? Would you really use lethal force against your stupid companion? Would you even be likely to attack him? My guess is that you wouldn't. More likely, you would express your anger verbally, demand an apology, possibly fiscal renumeration and in future keep a much closer eye on that party member, possibly even refusing to adventure with him in the future without fiscal renumeration for the risks inherent in travelling with an idiot. Perhaps demand a contribution or tithe to your church or a share of his loot. Violence between party members is short lived and may lead to more, a perpetual grudge against a Character over misconduct is much more fun to Roleplay. Perhaps one day you will forgive and forget, assuming the Ranger does something sufficiently worthy.

Polarbeast
2007-06-25, 07:07 PM
Agreed with bosssmiley and Tallis and all the others who have mentioned it already. I understand the panic of the GM, because player conflict was a new thing.

- A non-lethal punch in the gut with all your half-Orcish strength behind it. This guy just PUSHED you into a deadly situation without a chance for you to buff yourself, because he was bored (or rather, the player was bored, and I can totally imagine it: "I shove him into the room." Just 'cause.). There are consequences for this. That kind of player, left to his own devices, may eventually become the guy who wants to steal from or assassinate party members.

- In later situations: "Oh, are you hurt? I'd like to heal you. I might do so... if I were confident that you had the best interests of this party at heart."

The GM can't have his players fighting each other? Understandable. Then suggest that he keep an eye on how much antagonizing activity the players engage in. Why should you be expected to be forgiving when other characters are risking your life for casual reasons?

GoblinJTHM
2007-06-25, 07:09 PM
with that shove the half-orc DC check I think that warrants an attack of opportunity ><

Jack_Simth
2007-06-25, 07:25 PM
After a long, dangerous, harrowing trip through the crypt, the (mostly 4th & 5th level) party finally begins to realize they're heading back towards the surface after experiencing what can only be assumed is an earthquake, emanating from somewhere deep within the earth beneath their feet. The party cleric, a large, hulking half-orc, turns the corner and steps into the ruined doorway of a large-ish room with the following features:

* one wall is ruined - formerly sporting a large archway leading out of the dungeon, it is now blocked by rubble, resultant from the recent earthquake
* other three walls are largely barren, worked stone, one of which contains an iron door
* the ceiling is approximately 12 feet high
* smack dab in the center of the room is a very angry, very agitated, very trapped young copper dragon


Said party cleric sees said angry young dragon, and isn't quite ready to step into a room brimming with likely death, so he halts, attempts to keep the party behind him.

Party ranger decides he's bored with this "playing it safe" routine, and he shoves party cleric into the room with the dragon.
As DM
"Okay, make your bull rush attempt. Oh, incidentally, this will also put you into the same room, even if successful."

As Cleric:
Yeah, I'm going to duck, and trip him into the room.
(hey, if he gets to shove me without an opposed strength check....)

This sudden involuntary movement on the cleric's part is interpreted badly by the already agitated dragon, and said dragon proceeds engage the cleric in melee. Roll iniative!

As a DM, there's not too much you can do with this one; as a player.... well, dragon's trapped. Head back into the hallway and deal with it by voice from there. If you never actually deal damage to the beasty, you can explain away a trip or something.


...

Party defeats dragon. Everyone is alive. Yay. But wait...what's this? Party cleric (worshipper of a deity of courage, valor, and order in combat) seems to have taken umbrage to being shoved into a room with a very angry, very deadly creature by the unseemly, impatient, rude little elf ranger.
Cleric: "You choose not to respect orderly combat, instead forcing others to rush headlong where they want not to go? You will see the folly of your actions in time."
*later*
Ranger: Umm.. healing?
Cleric: What? It's not like you're dead. Suck it up, tough guy.
Other Party member: Umm... healing?
Cleric: Yeah, sure. I can spare a spell for a friend.


Party cleric's player has picked up a d20. He desires to lay the proverbial "smack" down on this rude, insipid little ranger, in the name of showing the elf how to respect his fellow party members.

As DM: "Okay, roll for initiative" (at this point, there's not much else to do); cleric has basically already declaired action, DM only person who can react at this stage.


Party DM (relatively inexperienced) and party Elf Ranger (complete newbie) panic. What should they do? How do we handle this? Answer? PRETEND IT NEVER HAPPENED.Bad answer, but not as bad as they get. If you want to unhappen something, you need to do it sooner (e.g., the original shove, at the time). Ideally, you don't unhappen things at all.

Grrosgor
2007-06-25, 08:12 PM
What would you be likely to do in real life? Would you really use lethal force against your stupid companion? Would you even be likely to attack him? My guess is that you wouldn't. More likely, you would express your anger verbally, demand an apology, possibly fiscal renumeration

Are you kidding? I'd be decking the guy! Probably not using lethal force but c'mon, the guy almost cost you your life, I've seen people get into fights in real life for much less. I certainly wouldn't just say "dear me, that wasn't very nice of you. I insist you say sorry and give me 50gp or you'll be hearing from my lawyer." (although I could see that possibly happening if you live in the states) :smallbiggrin:

But the suggestions from the others have been really good. Let them fight it out, it's their characters. Even if they go lethal damage, it's likely the other party members will step in and break it up (you'd hope so anyway). Worst case scenario is one member dies and the other has an alignment change.

I agree though that the player playing the Ranger has to learn there are consequences to ones actions.

Diggorian
2007-06-25, 09:33 PM
I forgot to mention it in my first reply, but I would have ran the initial shove by the normal rules of bullrush. No AoO cause the cleric would've been flat-footed to the ranger.

In a game I played a ghost possessed barbarian that was after a high level spellbook, the ghost wanted it. Our kobold trapsmith found the secret chamber containing it first, so I pushed him inside to trigger any traps there. He was blinded temporarily while I ran out with the tome.

My PC returned the party with missing time during a fight with a carrion crawler. It paralyzed me, and guess who came up to sneak attack my ignorant character?

Hell hath no fury like a kobold scorned :smallwink:

Corolinth
2007-06-25, 09:56 PM
Let's get a few things out in the open upfront. Not only did he just push the party into a potentially lethal confrontation unprepared, he shoved the cleric directly into harm's way (good way to get the whole party killed), and he forced a confrontation with a creature that could have been friendly under ordinary circumstances.

Welcome to the School of Hard Knocks, class of 2007.

As a player, the very first thing I'd have done was try to talk to the copper dragon. But this requires a little bit of metagaming on my part, based on dragons being color-coded for my convenience. Also, I really don't want to have to fight a pissed off dragon if I can avoid it. Second, I proceed to clean the newbie's clock. Fists, like a man.

As the DM (though I'm a bit more experienced than this guy, it would appear), I let you fight it out. However, since you're apparently playing an honorable type who's intent on teaching a lesson rather than doing some damage, I'm going to force you, by DM fiat, to deal nonlethal damage. I won't be sticking you with the -4 penalty to attack rolls, however. The ranger, if he fights back, won't be so lucky. It's not fair, but some lessons just need to be learned. It's better he learn that lesson now, from the LN or LG cleric, than have the CE cleric teach him that same lesson six months down the road.

As another player sitting at the table, we'll say the bard, I punch him. Way to go, genius! Push the cleric into a pissed off dragon! If he dies, who's gonna heal me?

Matthew
2007-06-25, 10:06 PM
Are you kidding? I'd be decking the guy! Probably not using lethal force but c'mon, the guy almost cost you your life, I've seen people get into fights in real life for much less. I certainly wouldn't just say "dear me, that wasn't very nice of you. I insist you say sorry and give me 50gp or you'll be hearing from my lawyer." (although I could see that possibly happening if you live in the states) :smallbiggrin:
Yeah, I was thinking about that while I was writing. It must just be my non violent nature, but I would be unlikely to actually attack the guy in question, mainly because of the situation (trapped underground with only three companions in a place with dragons). I was kind of thinking of war movies where somebody does something stupid. Sometimes they do attack the perpetrator, but not always.
I'm much more likely to challenge the guy to a fight than actually attack him, with words like "What do you think you were doing? Do you want to fight me? Do you want to get me killed?" They usually back down and apologise at the threat of violence and then you keep an eye on them. Punching the guy out doesn't really solve things without exposition, I would say. But, as I said, I'm not really a violent/impulsive sort of guy.

Thrall_Of_Ao
2007-06-25, 10:31 PM
have a nigh impossible DC check for a puny elf shoving a half orc in such a way to move him more than a tiny sway.

This is really the first thing I thought, but isn't the most important, since this is really more of a question of IC/OOC interaction (Followed closely by, how in the heck was KILLING a GOOD DRAGON OK?). even if the rules were used properly, and prevented this particular incident from occuring, it's almost gauranteed to happen again.

Because, to me it sounds like a clear case of player personality conflict.

I would have simply said IC "If you're so set on us going in there, YOU go in first". Followed by, "We need to work together if we're going to survive this," or something equally inclusive (if killing metalic good dragons is your thing that is...:smallfrown: )

It sounds like the GM, in an effort to keep things rollong, let something happen that could have got your PC killed, and at the same time made your PC look, and you feel, foolish. Something may of us (including me) don't like. Additionally, your PC was probably trying to make sure things were done in such a way so no one DID die, but was possibly (probably) being too overbearing (clerics and the people who play them often are), or slow, about it for the other players taste and he was expressing his annoyance by doing something IC about it.

The thing that many D&D players often forget is that the game is an extremely complex social interaction. Done right, it can lead to better communication, math, and problem solving skills that translate directly into every day situations. It can bring out the best and worst in us and even help us discover new things about ourselves.

But, as in any social interaction, conflicts are bound to arise, and the best way to deal with them is head on. Diplomatically, but directly.
Both of you should sit down and discuss what each of you were thinking in the situation and why you did what you did. I'm sure if you're both open to hearing each other out, things will work out just fine.

IC PC conflict, from a DM's standpoint is great, even encouraged, but when it crosses the line to where you, not just your PC, was personally offended, then damage control needs to be done, or the rest of the campaign (and everyone elses fun) will be affected and most likely suffer for it.

-TOA

DrummingDM
2007-06-26, 09:49 AM
Wow...a lot of practical, useful responses here.

Okay...a little background info on the situation, and characters involved that I should have deigned to include in my initial post...

The ranger is most certainly of the "ranged" variety, and my aggressive nature towards him was meant more as a "I'll pound the snot out of you, and leave you a bloody, unhealed pulp for awhile while you think about what you just did."

I was going to go at him unarmed.

And the elf had been singling out the half-orc IC with insults throughout most of the preceeding adventure. The ranger being new to the group, was certainly not a trusted companion. And his recent action of endangering myself, and the entire party hadn't earned him any loyalty points.

The insults and the dangerous, reckless behavior had not exactly enamored this newcomer to the half-orc cleric who has been operating in the role of party leader. Bashir the cleric got tired of this new chump undermining his authority.

(And...I'm willing to admit this new player seems more interested in running around being as nefarious, conniving, and underhanded as he can make his character be, and as a player, I don't see that behavior jivving with the rest of our group. I *may* have let that influence my reaction...

I kind of look forward to when he joins MY game. He won't get away with that crap.)

Grrosgor
2007-06-26, 07:08 PM
Yeah, I was thinking about that while I was writing. It must just be my non violent nature, but I would be unlikely to actually attack the guy in question, mainly because of the situation (trapped underground with only three companions in a place with dragons). I was kind of thinking of war movies where somebody does something stupid. Sometimes they do attack the perpetrator, but not always.
I'm much more likely to challenge the guy to a fight than actually attack him, with words like "What do you think you were doing? Do you want to fight me? Do you want to get me killed?" They usually back down and apologise at the threat of violence and then you keep an eye on them. Punching the guy out doesn't really solve things without exposition, I would say. But, as I said, I'm not really a violent/impulsive sort of guy.

Fair enough mate.

Have you ever gotten really really angry at a friend or someone close to you and just wanted to hit them? I know I have but had enough control not to. A lot of people don't, they literally lose control.

Which sort of raises the question. Could a good character still be in character when attacking a friend because they lost self control? Something to think about?

This whole thing reminds me of the time the Sorcerer in the party cast Enlarge Person on my Rogue. We were being attacked by an Owlbear and I assumed the sorcerer was trying to give me extra reach with my long spear but no. It was so I blocked the 10" wide corridor separating the Owlbear from the sorcerer :smallmad:

Oh well, I laugh about it now :smallsmile:

Matthew
2007-06-26, 07:29 PM
Yeah, siblings for sure, but never actually attacked them (well, not since childhood and only one occasion I can think of).

Actually acting upon the impulse, as different from feeling the impulse, is what I was trying to get at in the context of an Adventuring party. Saying that, from the above example it look increasingly likely the Half Orc Cleric would attack this Elf Ranger. I guess it depends on how you perceive the social contract of the Adventuring Party and a bunch of other considerations. Certainly, this Half Orc could be of the 'lose control' type.

I wonder what his Alignment is? I think you're right that Lawful Good/Good/Lawful Player Characters might find this loss of control an interesting aspect of their personality. Thinking about it, I suppose this is why the Barbarian usually Chaotic...

Tobrian
2007-06-26, 07:47 PM
(snip)
As a GM in the situation you described I'd have ignored you. or I would have glossed over how threatening you were and simply stated you were standing there fuming and being menacing.

So basically you would be using heavyhanded DM ruling to arbitrarily punish the player of the cleric, dictating his character's action and making his character look silly in the process? And siding with the player of the elf by simply pretending the problem doesn't exist and there won't be repercussions? Good job. <sarcasm> :smallyuk:


In this particular case you were in the wrong not him.

Excuse me, what? Who pushed whom into a room with an angry dragon?


Though he was a new player his reactions were pretty good for an in character move.

Again, what? Pushing the party cleric into a room with a dragon because you, the elf, feel "bored"? Unless that elf is evil and wants to assassinate the cleric, that move was brazenly stupid, both from an in-character survival point of view as from an inter-player dynamic.


By picking up your weapon and threatening to go lethal damage on him you crossed the line into unessesasry party conflict. Had you been going fists on him I'd have said roll initiative. You went lethal damage though and I wouldn't have that.

Oh, the holy cow of "intra-party harmony". You know, personally I hate it when players have their character attack another character, but what I hate even more is when one character is allowed to pick on another and that other character is then not allowed to retaliate for meta-gaming reasons, making him look like a pansy. Every schoolyard counsilor will tell you this only encourages bullies!

edited to add: THe cleric wasn't "picking up his weapon and threatening to go lethal damage" on the elf, see below.

Why do we have to cut "newbies" so much slack? This wasn't an issue of him not knowing some detail of the D&D setting or rules and making a wrong decision based on that... this was a case where the new player clearly stated he was "bored" and just endangered the life of another character for ****s and giggles.

If that elf and his player show remorse and admit they messed up IC and OOC, fine. If I was that cleric I'd tell the elf that if he is so eager to kill me, he can look for some other cleric to heal him because I wont be doing it in the future. Because your holy "party dynamic" is already in the toilet.

DMs everywhere, do NOT force a player to have his character kiss and make up with the guy he cannot stand, just because you the DM want to avoid party conflict... that conflict is already there and will be simmering inthe background if not resolved. You dont resolve such things by ignoring them.


Now had you pushed the issue I'd have gone ahead and let you roll it out, or a mysterious random encounter may interupt the action. Probabyl another earthquack aftershock, to start bringing down the ceiling.
Probably the best idea.


Okay...a little background info on the situation, and characters involved that I should have deigned to include in my initial post...

The ranger is most certainly of the "ranged" variety, and my aggressive nature towards him was meant more as a "I'll pound the snot out of you, and leave you a bloody, unhealed pulp for awhile while you think about what you just did."

I was going to go at him unarmed.

And the elf had been singling out the half-orc IC with insults throughout most of the preceeding adventure. The ranger being new to the group, was certainly not a trusted companion. And his recent action of endangering myself, and the entire party hadn't earned him any loyalty points.

See? The elf is a trouble-maker, and his player expects the DM to bail the character out when the victim of his "pranks" actually retaliates. That's typical bully behaviour. But as in real life, outsiders never seem to recognize the bully but instead label the victim a troublemaster when he fights back. :smallmad:

This needs to be resolved by having a word with the elf's player.

Bassetking
2007-06-26, 08:33 PM
*snip*
Oh, the holy cow of "intra-party harmony". You know, personally I hate it when players have their character attack another character, but what I hate even more is when one character is allowed to pick on another and that other character is then not allowed to retaliate for meta-gaming reasons, making him look like a pansy. Every schoolyard counsilor will tell you this only encourages bullies!

edited to add: THe cleric wasn't "picking up his weapon and threatening to go lethal damage" on the elf, see below.

Why do we have to cut "newbies" so much slack? This wasn't an issue of him not knowing some detail of the D&D setting or rules and making a wrong decision based on that... this was a case where the new player clearly stated he was "bored" and just endangered the life of another character for ****s and giggles.
*snip*

Preach the word loud, Tob. Dead on in everything posted.

I was once playing a Druid in a "Here's your pre-generated Character sheet, Let's rock." campaign, and was effectively leading our Rogueless party through a dungeon with "Know Direction", "Detect Snares and Pits", and "Create Water".

Our newest player was being forced (Through the "Here's your sheet, let's go" thing) To play a hard-drinking dwarvish fighter, instead of her usual "Let's go do some research, rather than adventure" Bookish Mage. Our DM wanted to encourage her to explore this role, and try out a new persona than the one she'd played for the last several campaigns.

This worked up until she decided that the Dwarf, because he was a dwarf, would be better suited to figuring out the dungeon, than the druid.

And proved this point, in the middle of a time and pressure-sensitive logic puzzle.

My second level character took 6d6 force damage, due to the dwarf grappling him off of the puzzle.

The Dwarf then proceeded to attempt to pin me, so that they could explain what a better job they could do leading the party.

I, innocently enough, ask two questions of my DM. "Is she pinning my arms to my sides, in this grapple?" and "Is she using both of her arms to maintain the Grapple?" His answers were "No" and "Yes" respectively.

So, I make a melee touch attack, while grappled, in order to place my hand directly over the Dwarf's left eye, allow her to finish the pin... and say two words.

"Produce Flame"

The session erupts. Half the players cheer me, the other half are aghast that I would try to cripple a fellow player. Chaos, babbling, shouting... and one VERY angry DM. Nigh-enraged that I would dare to cause actual physical harm to come to one of my co-adventurers.

My response, and one that I felt utterly, totally justified in putting forth, was "My character has absolutely no idea that her pin/grapple was benign, and intended as just a "Great big prolonged friendship-snuggle" "

The entire scene was ruled as "Never Happened" and we started back, before the puzzle, undamaged.

Diggorian
2007-06-27, 04:32 AM
"Produce Flame"

The session erupts. Half the players cheer me, the other half are aghast that I would try to cripple a fellow player. Chaos, babbling, shouting... and one VERY angry DM. Nigh-enraged that I would dare to cause actual physical harm to come to one of my co-adventurers.

Assuming this was in 3.x, it's too bad the DM forgot ya cant cast with somatic components in a grapple. Would've saved a lot of grief. Or, did you have it Stilled? Either way, the druids response was understandable IMO.


Which sort of raises the question. Could a good character still be in character when attacking a friend because they lost self control? Something to think about?

I'd think yes. Falling prey to enchantments constitutes a loss of control, but your alignment isnt threatened. How much they loose control is also a factor: swearing at the elf, still good; choking the elf to death, that's evil.

Corolinth
2007-06-27, 08:47 AM
The way I see it, there's two things that can happen here:

1) The elf gets smacked around a little by the cleric.
2) The elf's player gets cold-cocked later by one of the players who's getting sick of his ****.

The way I see this is that this just put a party member in danger just for kicks. He could've done that to any of the other PCs, and they know it. Only he didn't. He pushed the guy who heals everyone into harm's way, and that's just as bad. They all have a good reason to want to beat the stuffing out of this character.

If that keeps up, and the DM never lets the players deal with it in character, then the problem spills out of character. That's when things get ugly.

As far as good characters attacking their friends, that question is moot. This jackass isn't my friend. My friend wouldn't have just pushed me into a room with a raging dragon because he's bored.

GoblinJTHM
2007-06-27, 09:21 AM
The only time I can see the DM ignoring you and handling the situation well is if the whole thing was a set up where you we're in league with the new guy for him purposely putting someone like the healer into harms way so you could tell everyone about how poorly the DM handled the situation, no matter what the outcome was. Otherwise, I'd say the DM handled it poorly.