"Character flavor" or annoyance?

[Lukalaly]

I'm in a campaign with a Lumi. As you may know, Lumi hate dishonesty, and want to kill everything that has every been dishonest . Said Lumi player also says that he will be enforcing this rule in his play. Because of that, he says that none of the party can lie, and even feinting will cause him to attack you. Basically, limitations on the whole party just because of one character.
My question is this: is he justified in doing this? By "this", I mean putting limitations on the whole party, even though most of us have said that we don't like it. He's trying to say that it's okay because it makes for a good backstory and good fluff, which our DM said is quite important. Again, at least half of the party (excluding him and including me) has said that they don't like him being so controlling. I believe the reason he thinks this is okay is because he was the first person to announce his character idea, but D&D isn't really a first come first serve type of game in that sense. Everyone has to agree, or else no one has fun. Does anyone agree with me? If not, please tell me why you think that way, as I'd love to understand his logic.

Also, if anyone else has had/is currently having similar experiences with players trying to control the party, feel free to share! I like hearing stories. If you're having that sort of problem now, maybe you can get some advice?

[torrasque666]

Pelor no. This is the same reason why no one likes playing with stick-up-the-ass paladins.

[Daefos]

I'd love to understand his logic.

"This game is about me and only my enjoyment matters."

If the entire party was on board with it, it could be an interesting restriction to play with, but he's essentially laying down an arbitrary restriction and demanding everyone else follow it with the threat of PVP. Either tell him to drop that particular character trait or to to find another game. Some things would be okay for a single player to be able to "veto", particularly dark, real-world subjects that make the player themselves uncomfortable. But lying, any lying, is not one of those. Nothing good will come of letting a single player get away with dictating how everyone else is allowed to play to this degree.

If you're unwilling to do that, feel free to change his alignment to Chaotic and/or Evil (flying off the handle and murdering people for any kind of lying is neither Good nor Lawful behaviour); if he objects, remind him that he's the one that has decided to kill anyone, even allies, for an incredibly petty reason. Or just have something that vastly overpowers the party but is not hostile to them tell a blatant falsehood to his face: laugh as he either splatters himself for no reason or proves himself a cowardly hypocrite.

Edit: Oops, OP is not actually the DM so most of what I've said is not applicable. Not really sure what to suggest. If the DM is on-board with this, even though half the party isn't, then short of continuing to try and convince them or finding another game, there isn't really a lot you can do.

[Deophaun]

Here is how you deal with that:

"Hello Mr. Lumi. This statement is a lie."

Then walk away.

[Xanyo]

Here is how you deal with that:

"Hello Mr. Lumi. This statement is a lie."

Then walk away.
I'll second that. :smalltongue:


What I personally would do is get as many Bluff bonuses as possible and lie to his face. He can try to have his fun, you can try to have yours. Also, I bet if he attacks you, the party would side with you and kill him, making it a non-issue.

[barakaka]

If the party can dig it:
It could be fun for a few sessions where the lumi attacks another member of the party for lying; the party breaks up when a threat attacks whom requires all of them to join forces to neutralize it.

You can add in some angst on the lumi's side to complete the trope. Later on the lumi attacks again, mortally wounding another party member. He realizes what he's done and goes off on his own because he thinks he deserves death now. The rest of the party finds a way to resurrect the slain member, and save the lumi just in time before his very own demise. The lumi learns a valuable lesson in party etiquette, and they live happily ever after.


This is only if the rest of the party can play ball. If anyone has cold feet about it, then get them to voice their opinions to everyone. If you have cold feet about it, then you may have a hard time making social encounters with proper variance. Voice it in the same meeting. Just stand your ground about it, because this is for the enjoyment of everyone. A stick in the mud can make things fun, but it can also turn sour.

[Zanos]

I'd just lie, then when he tries to kill me get the party to back me up.

This is the RPG equivalent of "my way or the highway", with one player holding the rest hostage with his participation so they do what he wants.

[XionUnborn01]

Lumi aren't idiots. This guy is playing them like they are. They hate dishonesty but there's a reason their entry even talks about them not purging liars because their numbers are too small, they're not going to just sacrifice themselves to take out one liar.

I played a Lumi in a campaign and I told the party, "Look, I'm not going to lie. I won't lie for you or about you. I won't play along in a ruse or a deception. That being said, I'm smart enough to understand that humans aren't perfect creatures and have moral faults. I'll be preparing Atonement regularly and I'm assuming you won't resist it."

You don't impose your will by blindly attacking anyone who lies, that's just stupid. You impose your will by, in most cases for a Lumi, preaching the goodness of light. If there's a group of liars like a thieves guild or gambling cheats, then yeah, he's probably justified.


Side note: My Lumi became best friends with an Half Copper Dragon Ogre with an Int and Wis both around 8 but a charisma of 20. The Ogre didn't even really 'get' lies because they confused him generally, so he dug the Lumi getting mad about them.

[Tiri]

I played a Lumi in a campaign and I told the party, "Look, I'm not going to lie. I won't lie for you or about you. I won't play along in a ruse or a deception. That being said, I'm smart enough to understand that humans aren't perfect creatures and have moral faults. I'll be preparing Atonement regularly and I'm assuming you won't resist it.


Why would you prepare Atonement? It doesn't do anything in this case.

[Lukalaly]

Why would you prepare Atonement? It doesn't do anything in this case.
I'm assuming it isn't for actual mechanical effect, but rather for the fluff, as in atoning for your sin of lying.

I'd just lie, then when he tries to kill me get the party to back me up.

This is the RPG equivalent of "my way or the highway", with one player holding the rest hostage with his participation so they do what he wants.
That does sound like a nice option, as he is arguably one of the weakest members of our party of around 5, excluding him.

If the party can dig it:
It could be fun for a few sessions where the lumi attacks another member of the party for lying; the party breaks up when a threat attacks whom requires all of them to join forces to neutralize it.

You can add in some angst on the lumi's side to complete the trope. Later on the lumi attacks again, mortally wounding another party member. He realizes what he's done and goes off on his own because he thinks he deserves death now. The rest of the party finds a way to resurrect the slain member, and save the lumi just in time before his very own demise. The lumi learns a valuable lesson in party etiquette, and they live happily ever after.


This is only if the rest of the party can play ball. If anyone has cold feet about it, then get them to voice their opinions to everyone. If you have cold feet about it, then you may have a hard time making social encounters with proper variance. Voice it in the same meeting. Just stand your ground about it, because this is for the enjoyment of everyone. A stick in the mud can make things fun, but it can also turn sour.
That could actually be really cool! I'll send that to my DM to see what he thinks about it.

Here is how you deal with that:

"Hello Mr. Lumi. This statement is a lie."

Then walk away.
Again, sounds like a good option. But wait, if the statement is a lie, then that would mean you're telling the truth, right? Oh god, now I'm confused.

I'll second that. :smalltongue:


What I personally would do is get as many Bluff bonuses as possible and lie to his face. He can try to have his fun, you can try to have yours. Also, I bet if he attacks you, the party would side with you and kill him, making it a non-issue.
Hmmm, time to see if bluff is one of my class skills!
Edit: Oof, the closest thing I have is disguise. Eh, disguising yourself is lying too, and probably also punishable by death.

"This game is about me and only my enjoyment matters."

If the entire party was on board with it, it could be an interesting restriction to play with, but he's essentially laying down an arbitrary restriction and demanding everyone else follow it with the threat of PVP. Either tell him to drop that particular character trait or to to find another game. Some things would be okay for a single player to be able to "veto", particularly dark, real-world subjects that make the player themselves uncomfortable. But lying, any lying, is not one of those. Nothing good will come of letting a single player get away with dictating how everyone else is allowed to play to this degree.

If you're unwilling to do that, feel free to change his alignment to Chaotic and/or Evil (flying off the handle and murdering people for any kind of lying is neither Good nor Lawful behaviour); if he objects, remind him that he's the one that has decided to kill anyone, even allies, for an incredibly petty reason. Or just have something that vastly overpowers the party but is not hostile to them tell a blatant falsehood to his face: laugh as he either splatters himself for no reason or proves himself a cowardly hypocrite.

Edit: Oops, OP is not actually the DM so most of what I've said is not applicable. Not really sure what to suggest. If the DM is on-board with this, even though half the party isn't, then short of continuing to try and convince them or finding another game, there isn't really a lot you can do.
Sometimes I wish that I could DM and play all of my games for that very reason. This campaign is supposed to be Exalted Good, and if I were the DM, I would not let that fly. I don't think mass-genocide is very "Good", am I right?

[Tiri]

I'm assuming it isn't for actual mechanical effect, but rather for the fluff, as in atoning for your sin of lying.

The lumi is the only one who thinks lying is a sin, though. So it still​ doesn't do anything.

[icefractal]

This campaign is supposed to be Exalted Good, and if I were the DM, I would not let that fly. I don't think mass-genocide is very "Good", am I right?Exalted you say? Well you could play someone with Vow of Peace, and say that your vow overrides his - he can't attack people for lying, because that would be violent! :smallbiggrin:

Probably don't do that, but you could mention it to him; maybe he'd realize that kind of thing isn't so fun from the other side.

[Milo v3]

Definitely annoyance, 1 player shouldn't get to declare how the rest of the party plays. Also, does said player's character go on a killing spree everytime they go to buy a weapon... I mean shopkeepers aren't exactly known for telling the exact truth in fantasy.

[John Longarrow]

Out of character I'd talk to the player and the rest of the group. If EVERYONE is on board, fine. If most are and one player is willing to risk it, fine. If the group isn't interested in them having that character I'd suggest they figure out something new.

If the player says they won't change their character, get together with the rest of the party in game and let them know their services are not needed. Find a new member to join your group. That player will see their character removed from the party the easy way.

I would also talk to the DM about the issue you are having.

One of the most evil DM in game fixes would be to have a child lie to his character. 4 year old comes up claiming to be a great hero. What's their character going to do? GREAT ethical issue to face!

[KillianHawkeye]

Two things....

A) No, that is not okay. If somebody says they're making a character who will attack his fellow party members at the slightest provocation, the only logical response is "No, make a different character."

B) None of the characters would put up with such a person. Any teammate who is just as likely to attack a friend as an enemy just bought himself a ticket off the team. When you're facing the unknown and fighting for your life on a regular basis, you need to be able to trust that your comrades always have your back.

[AlanBruce]

Here;s the Lumi fluff which your fellow player is zealously adhering to:



The lumi themselves are honest to a fault and are known for their inability to hold back from telling others blunt and unflattering truths.

Not a big deal. If the Lumi decides to tell the party barbarian that he's an illiterate brute who would likely use a book as a pillow than for its actual purpose well...

Splat the Lumi goes.



They despise deception above all other offenses, and lies (or even simple illusion spells) are capital crimes within their settlements.

Ok, first off, i'm guessing that Lumi isn't on his home city in the Positive Energy Plane, but on the material with the others, so the party can tell him to shove his extreme believes down his non existent neck.

Second, you're adventurers and Invisibility is a thing. A thing that may very well may save the Lumi's rear end when in a dungeon, so... have him learn that amazing concept called Adaptability.




Lumi often travel to the Material Plane to battle wielders of negative energy or known deceivers. This can make them allies of good-aligned adventurers for a time, but they put their own code of honesty and truth ahead of the well-being of others. They think nothing of slaying those who offend their morality.

Unless someone in your party is a powerful Necromancer at a global or cosmic scale, or you have a Beguiler that has taken over several kingdoms, then the Lumi should not be pointing his weapon at any of you.

And if the above case is true: then he's not a party member, but an enemy that should be taken down.

In short, point out to the Lumi's player that this is a team game. If he doesn't want to accept, if IC he starts picking fights to the death with party members, then that player will learn that he chose to role play extremely poorly.

[Khedrac]

Personally I think the rest of the party should simply refuse to associate with the Lumi under the stated circumstances.

That said, ask him to agree to obey the law of the land. If he then attacks a party member simply for lying he is breaking the law and his stated agreement was a lie.

If you do end up with the Lumi in the party make sure the player and character know the difference between a lie and a false statement:
A "lie" is something the speaker believes to be false.
A False statement happens to be wrong.
If the speaker is misinformed the lie can be true and the honest statement false...

As for "This statement is a lie" it is neither true nor false - statements do not actually have to be either (and they can be both - consider "this statement is true")..

[Karl Aegis]

Why do you have a murderhobo in an exalted game and why are you going to lie in an exalted game? If someone lies declare them evil and murderhobo them like normal murderhobos.

[Deophaun]

Why do you have a murderhobo in an exalted game and why are you going to lie in an exalted game?
Because lying is chaotic, not evil, and Exalted doesn't care about the law/chaos axis.

[Geddy2112]

This kind of thing is not okay. The same goes for playing a kender and then using it as an excuse to steal everything from every party member and make them accept it.

This player is holding the group hostage by saying their concept is the correct one and nobody else can cross it. It is a team game, and the group needs to build characters that work together. Their character can dislike lying, never lie, and even be unhappy if the other party members lie. They can't enforce their ethos at swordpoint.

The only time a character or group dynamic takes precedent is if a new player or character wants to join. If you want to join a group of lawful goody goodies, then you can't bring in your chaotic evil murderhobo. The reverse is equally true.

With character concepts, the player is free to say that is what they want to play, but other players are free to say "you know, that won't really work with anyone". I doubt you all were intending to play pathological lying con artists, and this is far beyond "I want to play a good/evil aligned character and would prefer none of the opposite". This is "you have to work around my concept or else" which is not okay.

[Dragonexx]

Absolutely annoying. If his character concept essentially holds the group hostage and will attempt to kill them if they so much as feint then that is a bad character. If his "roleplaying" interferes with the fun of the rest of the group then he is a toxic player and should not be played with.

He has to either change his character or GTFO.

[BWR]

The golden rule about making PCs is 'make sure they fit in the game and work with what the other players want'.
If the rest of the group think this sounds fun, fine.
If not, this player has to make something new.

People insisting on playing whatever they want and the other players be damned have a lot to learn about cooperative play.

[dascarletm]

The whole never tell a lie thing could be cool to play as or with, but as your fellow player is doing it? No.

Imposing the inability to lie on fellow party members can be interesting if they are on board, no matter who told their idea to the DM first. However, killing them is the punishment if they lie? That's incredibly boring. It gives no option for roleplay or conversation.

[PacMan2247]

Neither. It's a personal interpretation of a race that diverges from the source material, and an attempt to exert control over the actions of other players' characters; 'annoyance' is nowhere near strong enough language.

Situations in which one player should control another PC's actions are relatively rare, and having it be a continuous, overarching part of one PC's concept defeats the purpose of having other players at the table.

[P.F.]

Annoyance.

However, it is an annoyance which could be tolerated. My top picks are:

1. Out-of-character social resolution. Ask him to soften his stance on feinting in combat (I mean really, that's a bit of a stretch, isn't it?) and on more ambiguous forms of dishonesty such as misleading truths and lies of omission. Explain that, while his character concept is really cool and interesting and you are all totally down for enjoying the role-playing opportunities that such restrictions on the party provide, the player must not use out-of-game knowledge to enforce his policy, and he should be prepared to sidestep the issue when necessary, by making himself scarce from time to time, and by not nosing into the private affairs of other party members. Remind him that nobody likes a busybody.

If he agrees to this, and the lying is done discreetly, it could be fun for everyone. However, the Lumi character will rapidly grow to resent an indiscreet, smug, you-can't-prove-I'm-lying character, so you'll still have to keep a lid on it. If, on the other hand, Lumi-player suggests that his character would be incapable of minding his own business to the degree necessary for other players to enjoy some lively deception every now and again, I would try

2. In-character social resolution. After the "Hi, I attack all liars" introduction speech, explain to him that in human polite society lying is not punishable by death, but murder is. Recommend that he find other, more socially acceptable excuses for attacking and killing known liars.

Given the tone of the OP, I would expect that Señor Lumí will not initially agree to this, which brings us to

3. In-character combat resolution. After mentioning that murdering people for "rolling a bluff check" is believed to be morally wrong in must human cultures, proceed to feint in combat, or tell a "little white lie" intended to allow an NPC to save face or to spare a party member's feelings. When the problem-character attacks the fellow PC, team up and subdue him, then explain to him that in human polite society lying is not punishable by death, but murder is. Recommend that he find other, more socially acceptable excuses for attacking and killing known liars. If possible, place a mark of justice upon him.

This should add some spice to his character's history, and allows him to enjoy the role-playing opportunities that such restrictions on his character provide. That failing, there is always

4. Out-of-character combat resolution. Put a bar of soap in a sock or large dice pouch, and conceal it on your person or near where you sit during the gaming session. Begin with taunting Monsieur Lùmî by suggesting that your character is considering telling a lie but has not actually done so yet. Suggest lying/feinting/deception as a solution to every problem, even ones it obviously will not solve. "Accidentally" use your bluff in place of diplomacy, intimidate, use magic device, et cetera, but then admit to it immediately, "Whoops, sorry, that was a bluff check. Shouldn't I add my diplomacy modifier instead?" Then, escalate by pretending to lie while actually telling the truth. Pass paranoia notes to other players with nonsensical or absurd messages, while saying that your character "whispers in their ear while looking at the Lumi character." Finally, begin to bend the truth and make statements which are not entirely true, but aren't actually false, either. Use weasel words like "maybe could have" and "might possibly" to qualify statements which are almost certainly false but could be true. Progress to telling outrageous lies immediately followed by loudly justifying them, arguing that in the proper context the statement could be seen as at least mostly true from your character's perspective. When Господин Лумы finally attacks your character ... actually, probably skip number 4 entirely. After all, in human polite society ... .

[Lukalaly]

4. Out-of-character combat resolution. Put a bar of soap in a sock or large dice pouch, and conceal it on your person or near where you sit during the gaming session. Begin with taunting Monsieur Lùmî by suggesting that your character is considering telling a lie but has not actually done so yet. Suggest lying/feinting/deception as a solution to every problem, even ones it obviously will not solve. "Accidentally" use your bluff in place of diplomacy, intimidate, use magic device, et cetera, but then admit to it immediately, "Whoops, sorry, that was a bluff check. Shouldn't I add my diplomacy modifier instead?" Then, escalate by pretending to lie while actually telling the truth. Pass paranoia notes to other players with nonsensical or absurd messages, while saying that your character "whispers in their ear while looking at the Lumi character." Finally, begin to bend the truth and make statements which are not entirely true, but aren't actually false, either. Use weasel words like "maybe could have" and "might possibly" to qualify statements which are almost certainly false but could be true. Progress to telling outrageous lies immediately followed by loudly justifying them, arguing that in the proper context the statement could be seen as at least mostly true from your character's perspective. When Господин Лумы finally attacks your character ... actually, probably skip number 4 entirely. After all, in human polite society ... .

Seeing as how this isn't the first time he's done something like this (and probably won't be the last), I'm thinking of doing that anyway someday. But fortunately, that day is not today, as he finally let up and changed his character idea. Before he did though, he basically said "I know that none of you like my character, so I'll just make you mad and have you kill him. Then I'll make a new character and it'll be fine." I'd rather have to change my character before the campaign starts rather than make a new one in the first meeting. I guess I just won't ever understand some people.

[kzkid126]

I am experiencing a similar situation. I'm DM-ing a campaign and one of the players likes to bust down shops and provoke guards, I've spoken with the other players and they aren't very happy with it either. It slows the game down. I've considered killing off the character but the party is only 3 people so killing off a player will kinda mess up the battle scheme I have planned, plus I don't like playing with less than 3 people.

[Deophaun]

Hmm... alternate idea: play a beguiler. Use your illusions to make him see things that are not there: important things. Things that he must absolutely tell others, like a dragon flying towards a town, a dead body in an alley with the suspect running away, or maybe he hears about a plot to assassinate the king. And as our honest lumi goes and spreads the alarm, it soon becomes apparent that whatever he said happened didn't. Give him the reputation of being what he despises.

Then, make sure other lumis know about the one going around telling tall tales, making them look bad.

[Lukalaly]

I am experiencing a similar situation. I'm DM-ing a campaign and one of the players likes to bust down shops and provoke guards, I've spoken with the other players and they aren't very happy with it either. It slows the game down. I've considered killing off the character but the party is only 3 people so killing off a player will kinda mess up the battle scheme I have planned, plus I don't like playing with less than 3 people.

Oooh, that's never fun. Civil discourse can solve a lot more problems than we think it can, so first I would talk to said player about it. If they continue, I would make the guards take them to jail rather than kill them, and have them pay a fine to get out. Depending on the power level of your party, then a reasonable monetary loss can set them back pretty far, especially if they're starting to buy magic items (mostly if they're going to buy magic items). Hopefully that teaches them their lesson, but if not, you could always throw some powerful LG summons or something at them, and tell them not to make a character that no one likes this time.

[Vizzerdrix]

4. Out-of-character combat resolution. Put a bar of soap in a sock or large dice pouch, and conceal it on your person or near where you sit during the gaming session. Begin with taunting Monsieur Lùmî by suggesting that your character is considering telling a lie but has not actually done so yet. Suggest lying/feinting/deception as a solution to every problem, even ones it obviously will not solve. "Accidentally" use your bluff in place of diplomacy, intimidate, use magic device, et cetera, but then admit to it immediately, "Whoops, sorry, that was a bluff check. Shouldn't I add my diplomacy modifier instead?" Then, escalate by pretending to lie while actually telling the truth. Pass paranoia notes to other players with nonsensical or absurd messages, while saying that your character "whispers in their ear while looking at the Lumi character." Finally, begin to bend the truth and make statements which are not entirely true, but aren't actually false, either. Use weasel words like "maybe could have" and "might possibly" to qualify statements which are almost certainly false but could be true. Progress to telling outrageous lies immediately followed by loudly justifying them, arguing that in the proper context the statement could be seen as at least mostly true from your character's perspective. When Господин Лумы finally attacks your character ... actually, probably skip number 4 entirely. After all, in human polite society ... .

Door knobs will also work.

[Echch]

...You could always just tell him that the "no-lie-allowed"-rule only applies in said settlements. As a Lumi, he would know that and act accordingly.

[Jay R]

Go with it. Throughout the entire session, every session, every other character should constantly tell the Lumi the exact truth. What you think about his approach, how nasty and bullying you think it is, how insulting it is, how much you dislike him and want him to leave the party. Tell him he's trying to elect himself the ruler of the party, and that you think it's dishonest for him to claim that level of power over you. Over and over and over and over again. If that's what you think, then you honestly have to say it.

Every time he complains, tell him that you have no choice. Every time. You are required to tell the truth. That's what you're thinking right now, and it would be dishonest not to say so. And don't let up.

You need to make clear to him that if nobody else is allowed to enjoy the game, then he won't be allowed to enjoy it either.

But don't do it by confrontation. Do it by giving in to his demand. There are more ways to kill a cat than by smothering it in cream, but I'm not sure it isn't the best way.