PDA

View Full Version : Player Help Preventing my party's slow slide into evil



Squiddish
2017-02-27, 12:28 PM
I'm playing a paladin in Curse of Strahd, and I am at the moment the only member of the party who hasn't been slowly losing all morality. Our cleric went from chaotic good to the most annoying type of chaotic neutral, then managed to crawl back to a more acceptable chaotic neutral. Our warlock has always been a sociopath, but now has been cursed to be actually evil. Our rogue is still chaotic good but has been slowly decaying.

How do I stop this without killing them?

(Don't suggest OoC stuff or blame the DM, he's equally appalled but this is an intended portion of CoS)

Koo Rehtorb
2017-02-27, 12:38 PM
Sit them down and have a good heart to heart with them IC and explain your concerns.

Flickerdart
2017-02-27, 12:45 PM
The only thing that can prevent a slow slide into evil is a fast slide into evil.

Yora
2017-02-27, 01:15 PM
If it's the result of reactions to what's happening in the adventure, this would be a technical question.

If it's just the players getting obnoxious then there's nothing but directly telling them that their antics are derailing the game and asking them to straighten up and play more seriously. You can't trick them into doing that if they are doing it on purpose.

GPS
2017-02-27, 02:19 PM
The only thing that can prevent a slow slide into evil is a fast slide into evil.

That's actually an accurate description of the campaign currently. (Chaotic stupid cleric here)
Appalled is a bit of an overstatement. I'd say from discord conversations the DM is more frustrated, as the purpose of the corruption element was that in theory, more of us were supposed to resist than give in to the temptations of evil.

(Just wanna reiterate the disclaimer that this is not the DM's fault, strictly among characters here)

Strigon
2017-02-27, 02:32 PM
A slow slide into Evil is a consequence of numerous small, but insidious choices that slowly grow into habits. And they're pretty much all a matter of taking the easy way out.
You have a prisoner; there's almost no way he'll repent, and the nearest place with a prison to hold him is days away in the other direction. You have no teleportation, and he's an unrepentant killer who would likely do it again, so you just off him and have done with it. Things like that.

The only way to stop such a slide is to make a conscious effort not to do these things. You will have to deliberately do things the hard way, or accept failure at certain tasks because success would mean doing the wrong thing. The issue is, once you start allowing yourself to do Evil things to achieve your goals, they become a crutch. At first, you do them because it's the only way out, then because it would be too inconvenient, and soon it looks like every goal can only be accomplished that way.

So next time you find yourself doing something ugly, stop. Take a look around, and ask yourself, "is this really the only way?" Chances are, if you really consider it, the answer is no. And if it is the only way, that's a good sign that your current goal should be reconsidered.

Segev
2017-02-27, 02:37 PM
Assuming the PLAYERS are on board with slowing, halting, or reversing this slide, it could be as easy as having the one who isn't yet sliding calling attention to each choice. Be that conscience they need. Even if there are pragmatic reasons, if there's a "good" way out, the players can choose to have their PCs feel chastised (or at least pretend they totally weren't going to do that awful thing that was just pointed out as awful), and choose the better path.

sktarq
2017-02-27, 03:24 PM
My first question would be. Is it stopping the fun?

If it is not then running with it may be more appropriate.

A good falling from grace character arc can be a blast to play.

GPS
2017-02-27, 03:40 PM
My first question would be. Is it stopping the fun?

If it is not then running with it may be more appropriate.

A good falling from grace character arc can be a blast to play.
The problem is, an evil CoS doesn't have all of those moral themes or challenging moral questions of a non evil CoS. You can just kinda kill your way through every moral dillema, which eliminates a fun bit of campaign content.



The only way to stop such a slide is to make a conscious effort not to do these things. You will have to deliberately do things the hard way, or accept failure at certain tasks because success would mean doing the wrong thing. The issue is, once you start allowing yourself to do Evil things to achieve your goals, they become a crutch. At first, you do them because it's the only way out, then because it would be too inconvenient, and soon it looks like every goal can only be accomplished that way.

Our warlock can't really help being evil, curse and all. Our rogue is leaning towards an alignment change because he almost used force to defend some (quite macabre) torture our warlock was getting into. (There was a good reason OOC for this, but none IC.) I became CN when I had a hunter in the woods (random encounter, miniquest hook) killed because he was pointing his crossbow at me and wearing dark clothing (we're not having that thread argument again). Or rogue and I could probably work on curbing our chaotic stupid tendencies.

Honest Tiefling
2017-02-27, 03:46 PM
That's actually an accurate description of the campaign currently. (Chaotic stupid cleric here)
Appalled is a bit of an overstatement. I'd say from discord conversations the DM is more frustrated, as the purpose of the corruption element was that in theory, more of us were supposed to resist than give in to the temptations of evil.

(Just wanna reiterate the disclaimer that this is not the DM's fault, strictly among characters here)

This is starting to sound hilarious. Any chance of a recap or a campaign log?

Red Fel
2017-02-27, 03:51 PM
The only thing that can prevent a slow slide into evil is a fast slide into evil.

Actually, this one is deceptively accurate. One of the best ways to stop someone from becoming a monster is to slap them in the face with a "What am I doing?" moment. And a great way to do that is to take their actions to their logical extreme - by pushing a fast slide into evil. Shove in their face the most ruthless, pragmatic, and monstrous option, one which would make perfect sense if they followed their present course. If they have any morality left inside them, the idea will strike them as repugnant, forcing a moment of soul-saving introspection.

If they don't have that scrap of morality, of course, you'll get to stand by and watch as they do exactly as you suggested.

So... win-win?

GPS
2017-02-27, 03:51 PM
Our warlock NecroDancer posts the logs

ShaneMRoth
2017-02-27, 04:04 PM
You might need to resort to a full-blown Cliche Storm.

Begin with I Know You’re In There Somewhere.

Segue to You’ve Got A Friend In Me.

Deliver a rousing speech inspired (*cough*plagiarized*cough) from both Independence Day and Pacific Rim.

And finish with a riff on Rick Astley’s Never Gonna Give You Up. (Yes, I’m recommending that you literally Rick-Roll the other members of the party. Especially, the warlock.)

In short, you have to play your Paladin so over-the-top inspirationally Big Good, that you rally the other players back to the Light.

You're going to have to role-play your way out of this.

Quertus
2017-02-27, 04:15 PM
Our warlock NecroDancer posts the logs

Where? Link plz.

GPS
2017-02-27, 04:18 PM
Where? Link plz.

I don't have the link, but I'll get Necro over here

Edit: it's actually the DM, Jamgrette r who posts our logs. I'm getting them from him right now.

Edit2: I thought he'd posted them, but apparently they're not up yet. Never mind, sorry about that

NecroDancer
2017-02-27, 04:20 PM
I don't have the link, but I'll get Necro over here

I'm not the one making the log but I eagerly await for when our DM finishes it

I'm so tempted to read this thread but I'm not going to ruin the suprise.

CharonsHelper
2017-02-27, 04:21 PM
A slow slide into Evil is a consequence of numerous small, but insidious choices that slowly grow into habits. And they're pretty much all a matter of taking the easy way out.
You have a prisoner; there's almost no way he'll repent, and the nearest place with a prison to hold him is days away in the other direction. You have no teleportation, and he's an unrepentant killer who would likely do it again, so you just off him and have done with it. Things like that.

While I agree with your sentiment - I don't agree with your example.

I've had Lawful Good characters who do that all the time without sliding to evil if the prisoner in question is deserving of the death penalty. (banditry/murder etc.) Taking them several days in which they have a chance to escape etc. isn't the good option - it's the Lawful Stupid option. (And what would their repentance or lack thereof have to do with their deserved punishment to a lawful character?)

GPS
2017-02-27, 04:34 PM
While I agree with your sentiment - I don't agree with your example.

I've had Lawful Good characters who do that all the time without sliding to evil if the prisoner in question is deserving of the death penalty. (banditry/murder etc.) Taking them several days in which they have a chance to escape etc. isn't the good option - it's the Lawful Stupid option. (And what would their repentance or lack thereof have to do with their deserved punishment to a lawful character?)
I feel like that fits the definition of Neutral Good better. Doing what's best in the moment for good.

CharonsHelper
2017-02-27, 04:39 PM
I feel like that fits the definition of Neutral Good better. Doing what's best in the moment for good.

Maybe - but nothing keeps a Lawful Good character from doing Neutral actions, much less Neutral Good ones - neither of which would affect his alignment much.

GPS
2017-02-27, 04:42 PM
Maybe - but nothing keeps a Lawful Good character from doing Neutral actions, much less Neutral Good ones - neither of which would affect his alignment much.

True, true. Sorry about that, I'm not the best with alignment

CharonsHelper
2017-02-27, 05:19 PM
True, true. Sorry about that, I'm not the best with alignment

*shrug* Alignment works best when no one takes it too seriously. It tends to shatter under close scrutiny.

Segev
2017-02-27, 05:32 PM
Actually, this one is deceptively accurate. One of the best ways to stop someone from becoming a monster is to slap them in the face with a "What am I doing?" moment. And a great way to do that is to take their actions to their logical extreme - by pushing a fast slide into evil. Shove in their face the most ruthless, pragmatic, and monstrous option, one which would make perfect sense if they followed their present course. If they have any morality left inside them, the idea will strike them as repugnant, forcing a moment of soul-saving introspection.

If they don't have that scrap of morality, of course, you'll get to stand by and watch as they do exactly as you suggested.

So... win-win?

This is, indeed, true. There's a reason traditional "corruption" tales don't typically have the one destined for the fall to the dark side go from sweetness and light and happiness to suddenly murdering children and raping innocent maidens in the most horrific ways possible with one "temptation." It's one reason that both Anikin Skywalker and Light Yagami rub some people the wrong way: there was no slow descent into it. They just kind of jump off the deep end when offered the slightest excuse. (Okay, Ani was pushed hard, but still; it was awfully swift of a fall.)

That is because the whole trick to it is that the tempted one doesn't notice what's happening. Sure, they know they made a compromise here or there. But nothing truly EVIL...not compared to what they normally do. It was justified before...so it's probably okay again...and now justifying a little more is feasible.

So yes, suddenly showing them that the little steps are actively on a slippery slope to something they still abhor can make them rethink the little steps. ("My god, what have I done?" can kick in even with billions of little steps, though, if they have what they're doing right now pointed out to them...but it's a lot easier to say "eh, whatever" when you're neck deep in it and it wasn't bothering you a moment ago.)

It's amazingly feasible to play a corrupter who is actively acting as the moral compass of the group, and doing so in a way that a cursory examination would find to be upstanding.

I was in an Infernals game, where all the PCs except for me were 'rogue' Infernal Exalted. This means they somehow got their Exaltations without willingly accepting the deal with the devil that Infernals are supposed to, and lacked many of the strings attached to such Exalted. My PC was to infiltrate their group and figure out what was up, and try to bring them into the fold.

He was a Fiend caste, for those who know what that means. And he was quite skilled at social stuff.

He also was a mid-teens youth who could put on an innocent face and presented himself as in the same boat the rest of them were: lost and confused. And, due to his wide-eyed youth, more in need of guidance.

He would consistently play up the innocent idealism, and actively point out that hard choices were hard because they asked for...less than good things. And in so doing, he got the other Infernals who were normally arguing with themselves to explain the justifications for why it 'had to be done' to him. By playing the Angel's Advocate just poorly enough, and still standing for idealistic virtue, he somehow managed to turn the whole party towards more and more corrupt ends.

He even brokered a deal with a Second Circle Demon to get the party crafter an Infernal manse...deep in Hell itself. Trying to help - genuinely - but also because it let his Yozi masters have more hooks in that Crafter. Nothing more sinister than the obvious, mind: he was spending time in Hell, working with demons, and seeing more and more ways to use his powers in ways that aligned with Hell's ethos rather than that of Creation.

In all, despite being probably the nicest of the PCs, and serving as their moral compass in the sense that they could look to him to see what they thought they aspired to be (and could be counted on to remind them of it if they were slipping), he was credited by the Yozis with their thorough corruption.

I still don't know if he really deserved the credit, or if they were just already on the path to it. But I like to claim credit. And it was fitting of Black Hole Sun Shining in the Darkness to do so, because his whole thing was sucking up the light in the room so he appeared to be bright and glorious, even if in reality it was more that the rest was dimmed in comparison.

Maybe it's deceptive, or maybe it's telling, that the shortening of his long title-name by which he usually went was "Shining."

Strigon
2017-02-27, 08:59 PM
While I agree with your sentiment - I don't agree with your example.

I've had Lawful Good characters who do that all the time without sliding to evil if the prisoner in question is deserving of the death penalty. (banditry/murder etc.) Taking them several days in which they have a chance to escape etc. isn't the good option - it's the Lawful Stupid option. (And what would their repentance or lack thereof have to do with their deserved punishment to a lawful character?)

Well, it depends on the specifics, but I meant to imply that he could be safely transported back to a secure facility, but it would take several days of going in the opposite direction. He wouldn't escape, and he wouldn't be killed, but nobody would miss him if you offed him then and there.
The point wasn't to provide something morally reprehensible, just the start of a slide down to Evil.



Our warlock can't really help being evil, curse and all. Our rogue is leaning towards an alignment change because he used force to defend some (quite macabre) torture our warlock was getting into. I became CN when I had a hunter in the woods (random encounter, miniquest hook) killed because he was pointing his crossbow at me and wearing dark clothing (we're not having that thread argument again). Or rogue and I could probably work on curbing our chaotic stupid tendencies.

1) Your Warlock can't help being Evil, or can't help doing Evil? The two aren't necessarily tied together. And if the DM is forcing him to do Evil, that's generally considered poor form. Not trying to start a fight where everyone's already happy, just throwing it out there.
2) That's the sort of thing I'm talking about; torture is up there for the most Evil acts, and is pretty much unjustifiable. Finding another way to get information (I'm assuming that's why he was torturing that person) would be the non-Evil way to do things.
3) Way to escalate the situation. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5Ye_dAge-4&t=342s)
Yeah, he was almost certainly trying to harm you, but unless you're level 1, a single crossbow bolt was unlikely to be lethal. You could probably have afforded to take the first hit, and I'm pretty sure that unless he was actually threatening you, killing him was a step too far. Like I said, little things.

Jamgretter
2017-02-27, 09:16 PM
Yeah, he was almost certainly trying to harm you, but unless you're level 1, a single crossbow bolt was unlikely to be lethal. You could probably have afforded to take the first hit, and I'm pretty sure that unless he was actually threatening you, killing him was a step too far. Like I said, little things.
Oh no, I never want to have this discussion ever again...

CharonsHelper
2017-02-27, 09:20 PM
Yeah, he was almost certainly trying to harm you, but unless you're level 1, a single crossbow bolt was unlikely to be lethal. You could probably have afforded to take the first hit, and I'm pretty sure that unless he was actually threatening you, killing him was a step too far. Like I said, little things.

So you have to let someone actually shoot you before you're allowed to defend yourself? lol

Squiddish
2017-02-27, 09:30 PM
1) Your Warlock can't help being Evil, or can't help doing Evil? The two aren't necessarily tied together. And if the DM is forcing him to do Evil, that's generally considered poor form. Not trying to start a fight where everyone's already happy, just throwing it out there.
2) That's the sort of thing I'm talking about; torture is up there for the most Evil acts, and is pretty much unjustifiable. Finding another way to get information (I'm assuming that's why he was torturing that person) would be the non-Evil way to do things.
3) Way to escalate the situation. (https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=m5Ye_dAge-4&t=342s)
Yeah, he was almost certainly trying to harm you, but unless you're level 1, a single crossbow bolt was unlikely to be lethal. You could probably have afforded to take the first hit, and I'm pretty sure that unless he was actually threatening you, killing him was a step too far. Like I said, little things.

1. The DM isn't forcing him, it's a curse, that is part of the adventure.
3. NOPE, we are not having this discussion again, last time it boiled over into a long discussion. Long story short, we thought he was going to break the warlock's concentration on the fly spell keeping us in the air.

GPS
2017-02-27, 09:31 PM
So you have to let someone actually shoot you before you're allowed to defend yourself? lol
A bit of background: A forum debate raged for 5 days and 7 pages about this same incident, but the focus then was Squiddish. It ended up kinda nasty, so Jamgretter and the rest of us have been trying to avoid the woods incident for a while. I just posted it as added background to why our party is slowly sliding down in alignment

Edit: Never mind, Squidd said it better than I did while I was typing this up (I'm a slow typer)


1. The DM isn't forcing him, it's a curse, that is part of the adventure.

Also, let me just add for clarification. Our warlock didn't remove the dude's eyes at the DM's orders, he came up with that little gem all on his lonesome, and got some other party members to go along with it. That was the concerning thing. He was in the right there, just playing his character by his alignment, and doing it correctly (though we didn't know he was cursed at the time and half of us got super concerned). The concerning thing was that our rogue and a party member trapped in a raven's body (long story) both went along with it, even though neither of them are evil. (The rogue was OOC attempting to show us the error of our quarelsome ways, but did that by joining Team Gouge Eyes and Remove Thumbs.) I believe that incident may have been an influence in Squidd's creation of this thread.



2) That's the sort of thing I'm talking about; torture is up there for the most Evil acts, and is pretty much unjustifiable. Finding another way to get information (I'm assuming that's why he was torturing that person) would be the non-Evil way to do things.

He was actually attempting to ensure a revenant didn't escape by blinding him and cutting his thumbs off. He kind of forgot revenants had regen and about a thousand ways to kill themselves.

Zingzing Jr.
2017-02-27, 09:54 PM
Hi rogue here, I'm not sliding I'm chaotic good that has always been more chaotic than good. The torture thing was me being tired and bored. I actually enjoy the sociopathic tendencies of the warlock, it makes for a great drama.

GPS
2017-02-27, 10:03 PM
Hi rogue here, I'm not sliding I'm chaotic good that has always been more chaotic than good. The torture thing was me being tired and bored. I actually enjoy the sociopathic tendencies of the warlock, it makes for a great drama.

That it does, my man, that it does. I was about to drop a Guardian of Faith and kill our warlock bud, and you were about to kill me. It was pretty scary, but I have to admit, that exhilaration was enjoyable.

Flickerdart
2017-02-27, 10:08 PM
I'd say from discord conversations the DM is more frustrated, as the purpose of the corruption element was that in theory, more of us were supposed to resist than give in to the temptations of evil.

Really, your DM thought that would work out? It is to laugh.

Never rely on the assumption that PCs will do something specific. Especially when that specific thing is "working really hard to be good and nice."

This situation is entirely the DM's fault for not being on the same page with the players. If he is smart, it will be a good lesson for next time.

GPS
2017-02-27, 10:11 PM
Really, your DM thought that would work out? It is to laugh.

Never rely on the assumption that PCs will do something specific. Especially when that specific thing is "working really hard to be good and nice."

This situation is entirely the DM's fault for not being on the same page with the players. If he is smart, it will be a good lesson for next time.

It's less an invention of the DM and more one of the underlying themes of the Domains of Dread. As such, it appears a lot in Curse of Strahd. The setting is full of constant temptation of evil, and it's easy to give in.

Flickerdart
2017-02-27, 10:14 PM
It's less an invention of the DM and more one of the underlying themes of the Domains of Dread. As such, it appears a lot in Curse of Strahd. The setting has constant seduction of evil, and it's easy to give in.

I didn't say anything about the DM inventing the idea of corruption. The problem is that the DM expected the PCs to resist. Resisting is hard, and expecting PCs to take the hard path is stupid.

Xanyo
2017-02-27, 10:22 PM
Hi rogue here, I'm not sliding I'm chaotic good that has always been more chaotic than good. The torture thing was me being tired and bored. I actually enjoy the sociopathic tendencies of the warlock, it makes for a great drama.

I'm preeeeeeeety sure that's more Chaotic Neutral or Chaotic Evil - probably not Good.

GPS
2017-02-27, 10:24 PM
I didn't say anything about the DM inventing the idea of corruption. The problem is that the DM expected the PCs to resist. Resisting is hard, and expecting PCs to take the hard path is stupid.
I expressed the reason we were tempted by evil kinda poorly. The thing is, it wasn't really even the natural temptation that drew us to evil, it was a series of fun coincidences. First things first, we got something stolen by an assassin wearing a dark hood. Next session, our would-be plot hook for a random encounter miniquest is a hunter in a dark hood of a different color. My flaw was paranoia, so I got jumpy and told our warlock that the dude was going to shoot me if he didn't kill him. Plot hook dead, paladin didn't stop us for whatever reason. Our rogue and raven joined in some torture with our newly cursed NE party member, but instead of a good story reason, it was more spur a of the moment "cause we felt like it" type thing, and they kinda just went along with it. Almost sparked some PvP because of the macabre nature and extent of the torture. We basically seduced ourselves.
Kind of ironic when you think about it as our warlock was the one who resisted direct temptation from Strahd and refused to kill our paladin.
The DM basically only made one assumption, that the paladin would stop us from killing miniquest-hook-hunter.


I'm preeeeeeeety sure that's more Chaotic Neutral or Chaotic Evil - probably not Good.
Yeah, that's likely to cause an alignment shift if more of it occurs. He wasn't in the torture, per se, he was more defending the torturers in character by use of force.

Strigon
2017-02-27, 10:45 PM
So you have to let someone actually shoot you before you're allowed to defend yourself? lol

In a world where being shot is only an inconvenience for the weak? Yes, absolutely. Or at least prove that he will.
Suppose, for example, you're walking down the road armed with an AK-47, and you have buddies with you who are similarly armed.
You see someone with a pellet gun, or similar weapon that would take at least 30 seconds of sustained fire before it will cause serious injury. You're telling me the appropriate response is to immediately unload and slaughter the fellow?

Now, you (OP) say he might have broken your fly spell, and that you had a really good reason for allowing the torture, and that he was cursed, which is somehow not the GM's doing(?), to which I respond those are all justifications.

Unless the curse is actively making him do Evil things, in which case those are mostly justifications. Do you know why people do Evil? It's not because they like doing Evil, it's usually because the Evil things get them what they want. They get results.
If you want to stop the slide into Evil, you will have to stop doing Evil things. This will inevitably mean not doing the most brutally efficient thing for yourselves. If you don't want deal with that, you can absolutely continue on your merry way down to Evil; nobody's stopping you!

GPS
2017-02-27, 10:54 PM
...he was cursed, which is somehow not the GM's doing(?), to which I respond those are all justifications.

Unless the curse is actively making him do Evil things, in which case those are mostly justifications. Do you know why people do Evil? It's not because they like doing Evil, it's usually because the Evil things get them what they want. They get results.
If you want to stop the slide into Evil, you will have to stop doing Evil things. This will inevitably mean not doing the most brutally efficient thing for yourselves. If you don't want deal with that, you can absolutely continue on your merry way down to Evil; nobody's stopping you!
Little clarification, because I kinda suck at getting my thoughts right the first time. The warlock wasn't forced to do evil, it was just a simple alignment change. The rest was up to him. His curse was due to a magical mirror that summons an assassin for one round, but has about a 1:4 chance of cursing you by making you NE without you knowing it. It's made things...interesting, to say the least.

icefractal
2017-02-27, 11:02 PM
In a world where being shot is only an inconvenience for the weak? Yes, absolutely. Or at least prove that he will.What world is that? Not D&D. Being shot by some random mook with a normal crossbow is an inconvenience. Being shot by an assassin using poisoned, spell-storing bolts that are charged with Dissolving Weapon is pretty deadly. Now try to tell the difference from beyond magic-detection range.

GPS
2017-02-27, 11:07 PM
What world is that? Not D&D. Being shot by some random mook with a normal crossbow is an inconvenience. Being shot by an assassin using poisoned, spell-storing bolts that are charged with Dissolving Weapon is pretty deadly. Now try to tell the difference from beyond magic-detection range.
*sigh*. Here's to the dream that this thread doesn't turn into "Should the Paladin Fall?: Part 2". I have a feeling I'll be regretting bringing up the hunter by the end of this.

Kane0
2017-02-27, 11:36 PM
Firstly, alignment means nothing (in 5e). It really doesn't impact anything more than what people think of you, IC and OOC.

Secondly, you're playing Curse of Strahd. Being surrounded by oppresssive evil and nastiness is kind of it's thing.

So don't sweat it. If you guys end up totally despicable by the end, that's sort of the point of the adventure. The important thing is that everyone had fun.

MarkVIIIMarc
2017-02-28, 12:42 AM
In Real Life soldiers and mercenaries frequently seem to have problems with what they had to do in battle.

In movies and tv, my goodness, don't I remember Jack Bauer shooting someone in the knee as part of an interrogation?

My current character was thrust into adventuring by some horrible recent events and probably changed from Chaotic Good to Chaotic Neutral in session zero. We'll see if there are a few evil temptations up ahead.

Malifice
2017-02-28, 03:22 AM
Hi rogue here, I'm not sliding I'm chaotic good that has always been more chaotic than good. The torture thing was me being tired and bored. I actually enjoy the sociopathic tendencies of the warlock, it makes for a great drama.

Lol. Chaotic good. I hate to break it to you but you sound a lot more chaotic evil.

You get joy out of the fact that you hang around with a sociopathic warlock and joined in on brutal torture and maiming because you are... tired and bored?

OP you got two options - change online into evil and join in this madness or talk to everyone out of game.

Personally I blame the DM but hey.

Squiddish
2017-02-28, 06:48 AM
(Don't suggest OoC stuff or blame the DM, he's equally appalled but this is an intended portion of CoS)



This situation is entirely the DM's fault for not being on the same page with the players. If he is smart, it will be a good lesson for next time.




OP you got two options - change online into evil and join in this madness or talk to everyone out of game.

Personally I blame the DM but hey.

Did either of you read the OP? Like, at all?


What world is that? Not D&D. Being shot by some random mook with a normal crossbow is an inconvenience. Being shot by an assassin using poisoned, spell-storing bolts that are charged with Dissolving Weapon is pretty deadly. Now try to tell the difference from beyond magic-detection range.


In Real Life soldiers and mercenaries frequently seem to have problems with what they had to do in battle.

We are not having this discussion again, we already resolved it. It was bad, but not enough to cause an alignment change unless you refused to admit it was wrong.

GPS
2017-02-28, 07:55 AM
Lol. Chaotic good. I hate to break it to you but you sound a lot more chaotic evil.

You get joy out of the fact that you hang around with a sociopathic warlock and joined in on brutal torture and maiming because you are... tired and bored?

OP you got two options - change online into evil and join in this madness or talk to everyone out of game.

Personally I blame the DM but hey.

Warlock is not a sociopath IRL, he's a cool dude. That's just what we started calling his character when he was down to about 1 HP, wandering through a very dangerous house, and decided to kill a nearby hostile cat for dark one's blessing. He just kinda thought neutral evil meant "gotta do some torture if the situation calls for it". Raven only really got into the torture because she wanted that spoon she had to finally be used for something. You've already heard rogue's.
Rogue may have gotten in on the torture for fun, but Warlock honestly thought it was the only way to blind the dude so he wouldn't be able to escape (the dude was a super buff revenant, and as I said earlier, warlock forgot about revenant regen).

Our DM wasn't OK with the torture either, which was why he stopped the warlock and the Raven from stealing the dude's thumbs, then stopped me from dropping a Guardian of Faith that would have murdered one of them them while the paladin attacked from the other direction, because we were all at low HP from a previous encounter.

Well, you know what they say. When the going gets tough, GPS burns everything and denies everything. Hope the thread ends up OK Squiddish, sorry about the mess.

Segev
2017-02-28, 10:23 AM
Because the default rules regarding alignment are generally that they're descriptive, rather than prescriptive, things get weird when somebody is cursed with an alignment change. By the "descriptive" definition, the player can just keep playing the character exactly the same...and eventually have the alignment change back because he's not done anything to support the new one. This is generally considered poor RP, and in earlier editions you could get XP penalties for doing it.

It sounds like your Warlock player is trying to play it honestly. He hasn't had a "slow slide into evil" so much as being forcibly dunked and held down there until he stopped kicking. If the player wants back up, it's supposed to be a difficult road because the CHARACTER wants to be evil and finds being good just as abhorrent as he once found being evil to be. Moreso, in fact, if he wasn't Good to begin with.

You haven't asked for suggestions on mechanically dealing with the alignment curse, so I won't belabor that. You seem to have that well in hand.

The other PCs' slow slide sounds like what we should be focusing on, and it also sounds like the players of those PCs recognize there's a problem and want to RP pulling up. So all it should take is making the harder choices and balking at the Warlock's evil suggestions and ideas to start that way. They might also be concerned over what drove them to that, and what made their ally the warlock turn so dark so fast.

Thajocoth
2017-02-28, 11:48 AM
If a DM creates an important plot hook giving NPC, and the players destroy him/her before he/she opens his/her mouth... Then the DM can simply change that NPC to have been a random encounter assassin and have the real NPC actually be somewhere else.

Perhaps the assassin had tied up the real plot hook NPC & took his/her clothes. Now the new version of the NPC doesn't appear threatening to the trigger happy players, and can provide his/her plot hook as a reward for having saved him/her. This also gives the players justification for their actions, as the person they killed was an actual assailant, about to attack them.

Any knowledge the PCs don't have yet is Schrodinger's knowledge & can be adjusted at any time. A DM should always remember that when the PCs lack of knowledge happens to destroy some of their plans.

DMs can apply this to encounters as well. If a DM wants the players to fight X, Y, & Z, but the players have a choice between two doors and X, Y, & Z can only be behind one of those doors... Well, the players don't know which door they're behind, so the DM could make the decision AFTER the players open one. The players still FEEL like they made a decision as to which way to go in the dungeon. That second door is really just the DM's out if the players wind up having to run from X, Y, & Z, giving the players an easier bypass to take.

This kind of flexibility allows you to have plans regardless of where your players go or what your players do, and allows you to put the content in front of them that you designed to be interesting and fun.

sktarq
2017-02-28, 02:03 PM
Okay - things may have changed in 5e but in 2 and 3e half the fun of Ravenloft was that you could fall and be corrupted and by Power Checks get both blessed and cursed. Falling a little and working your way back is a classic part of the world.

If there is ever a world to play such things in that's it. I would say giving into evil-for whatever reason-is a more rich and thematic experience in the Demiplanes of Dread than in any other CS.

I'm not saying that the Paladin should fall (they are so much weirder in Ravenloft for a reason) but having him lead the back to good does mean they need a bit of travel to get to good in order to have a narrative arc.