Should I retire the character?

[ErebusVonMori]

I'm in a game where my cleric's religion just get decimated by an outside force and my character is currently going though a break down after watching his equivalent of the Pope and the Vatican get levelled along with centuries of magical knowledge (He's Jasidin so that hurts a lot too.)

Now the other players apparently aren't liking his burning drive for vengeance and his anger at their lack of concern so do I retire the character as the other players aren't enjoying their presence anymore?

[denthor]

Tone it down. This why people go off on D&D players saying things like it led to suicide they could not tell the difference between the character and themselves.

It is a game.

You want vengeance? Ok set it up so that you attempt a raid hit a major city kill the character not your personality.

If the players you are with do not care ask them to help you with the strike .

If not let go. Roll a new character if you want. But make sure it has no trace of your current character.

[ErebusVonMori]

I take my separation of player and character very seriously. I mean how else is he going to react to everything he loves being destroyed in front of him? And if that's bad for the group then surely I have to ditch the character?

[Psyren]

Your character has a primary drive (vengeance) but the rest of the party for whatever reason is not that interested in pursuing it. You therefore have two choices - keep your character and put that stuff on the backburner for now, or send that character off on their solo mission and introduce something/someone else to play instead.

What you should NOT do, is allow the character's attitude to sour your IRL relationships with the people you play with out of game. No D&D character is worth losing friends over.

If your character is willing be patient and let their vengeance wait, maybe the group can deal with it later in the campaign, or the GM can find a way to work it in. Forcing the issue will just make them resent you (the player.)

[ErebusVonMori]

Problem is the DM seems to resent my character's desire for vengeance and I simply don't see how else I could react.

[Psyren]

I don't mean to sound harsh, but you can't force people to care about your character's subplot. Talk to the group about how important this is to you (they're your friends, right?), and if they're still not interested, you go back to the two choices I listed.

[Trampaige]

Tone it down. This why people go off on D&D players saying things like it led to suicide they could not tell the difference between the character and themselves.

It is a game.

You want vengeance? Ok set it up so that you attempt a raid hit a major city kill the character not your personality.

If the players you are with do not care ask them to help you with the strike .

If not let go. Roll a new character if you want. But make sure it has no trace of your current character.

Well, that escalated quickly. "My character's church was annihilated and is full of vengeance, my party doesn't care." "Remember not to kill yourself IRL, it's just a game." What? Just, what?


Your character has a few issues. One, their arc just changed completely. They might be driven to extreme measures going forward. Torture, no quarter for those they blame, being merciless in general where they might have shown compassion before. They might pursue a darker means of power mechanically (grey guard, ur-priest, warlock.) They might become a zealot to the cause, either still on the path of their god, or falling from grace and damning the consequences.

But that's your character. You have to play with your party still.

It's kind of a **** move and bad RP on the part of the other players to be completely ambivalent to what happened. But if that's the state of the game, you can't be disruptive OOC about it. You have to either find a way to work with the framework the rest of the party has established, or yes, retire the character.

The question is, will retiring the character be disruptive to the campaign? You'll still be in the game, but you'll have lost access to the memories, references, and relationships of the party and have to start over. You and your DM lose all the hooks associated with your character. A new character does give the DM an opportunity for new hooks or to tie into existing ones, but they may not be interested in doing the work (even if they basically caused the issue by nuking the vatican.) If your party is pretty RP light and just suddenly, "Cool. We have a new cleric without PTSD. Go drop a blade barrier on something," then great. If it's a deeply connected party, you become the odd one out.

But ultimately, while the needs of the campaign and the party are important, it's also important for you to have fun. If you become bitter about having to play your character in a way that you no longer enjoy, the character has to go.

[TotallyNotEvil]

I think it's the opposite and you should keep at it. That's a great RPing and character develoment opportunity.

[Nifft]

Problem is the DM seems to resent my character's desire for vengeance and I simply don't see how else I could react.

Talk to your DM.

Ask how he or she expected your character to react.

It sounds like there's some miscommunication happening, and together you can resolve that.

Hopefully the DM doesn't resent your character's personality or desires, and together you can work out a satisfactory path forward.

[Blackhawk748]

I don't mean to sound harsh, but you can't force people to care about your character's subplot. Talk to the group about how important this is to you (they're your friends, right?), and if they're still not interested, you go back to the two choices I listed.

Except the DM specifically destroyed the majority of his religion, how else is a Cleric supposed to act? Hell i did that to a player i'd expect them to call for a flipping crusade on whoever did it.

[ErebusVonMori]

Problem is that everyone else I'm told actively dislikes the character development, and the problem with retiring the character is that he's got an artefact of his church that's giving us a lot of the plot. But I genuinely don't see how else my LE cleric could react in any other way and people don't like that reaction.

I feel like I'm being shoehorned into a position and then criticised for it.

[Blackhawk748]

Problem is that everyone else I'm told actively dislikes the character development, and the problem with retiring the character is that he's got an artefact of his church that's giving us a lot of the plot. But I genuinely don't see how else my LE cleric could react in any other way and people don't like that reaction.

I feel like I'm being shoehorned into a position and then criticised for it.

Ya, im really confused here. The Cleric, with the MacGuffin, just had their entire church obliterated and they are annoyed that you turned into Pope Angry McVengeance. Its even weirder because the MacGuffin is from the church that just got obliterated, like, did they not even care about it?

Seriously, your groups reaction seems so out of place.

[Rynjin]

Have a detailed discussion OOC with everybody about it.

And then, IME, drop the character anyway because people usually don't actually know WHAT they want and will tell you the opposite and then get pissed later.

I had a character who died through the actions of a group of Monks (partially fueled by DM miscommunication), and had planned revenge on them after being Raised. Easy enough, since we had negotiated with a group of Duergar to wipe them out anyway, though we mostly agreed so we could pass through their city unharmed. I asked the DM "Will this break the campaign if I do this? Is it fine?" he said yes.

I asked the other players "Are you cool with me killing the Monk's leader and letting the Duergar through to attack? If not I can get some less permanent type of revenge like stealing that relic of theirs before we head off." they said "Either is fine".

So next session comes around as, funnily enough, the Duergar have just busted through the back door of the Monk's fortress. So, perfect timing to kill the Monk leader and get in good with the Duergar. Immediate party schism. Druid is opposed and sides with the monks, Barbarian (whose first session was the previous, and when asked his opinion IC always said "It's not my place to comment") sides with her, me and the Bard are on the other side.

Campaign ends there with the Druid and Barbarian players quitting the group when we start a new campaign. Apparently the DM's thought process was "It's fine, because the rest of the party will side against Mihtal and kill him, problem solved" (which to be fair I said was a fine outcome if it went down like that). The party being 50/50 split made it not fine to him now.

The moral of the story is this: Always make sure, absolutely, 100% positively sure that what your party SAYS and what they actually THINK or FEEL line up as you discuss this, and err on the side of caution. It is INCREDIBLY frustrating to always be the one who compromises their actions to make nice (I'll admit a bit of bitterness that this was the second time the Druid had sided with our enemies in a conflict due to some moral quandary, but gets away with playing their character while I had to bend over backwards to justify her nearly killing me and the Bard and still traveling with us), but it's an unfortunate fact that somebody always has to be the doormat or the group falls apart.

[ErebusVonMori]

The other bit I don't get is the lack of empathy from the other characters. I mean I'm the secretly evil character and even I think now would be a good time to be kind to someone who went through that and yet the 'good' characters honestly couldn't care less that one of their group just saw everything they love burn, in person, and that's somewhat breaking my immersion too.

That supposedly the evillest character of the group is having the most 'good' reaction. Like seriously? How is the guy bent (secretly, only the DM knows) on world domination the only one with a shred of empathy?

[Psyren]

Except the DM specifically destroyed the majority of his religion, how else is a Cleric supposed to act? Hell i did that to a player i'd expect them to call for a flipping crusade on whoever did it.

I'd probably expect that too, but I wouldn't expect the entire party to drop everything they're doing right this minute and focus exclusively on my subplot.

Think about it, any baddie capable of nuking an entire religion is not the sort of opponent you rush off half-cocked to face. Maybe the party is apathetic, or maybe they just don't want to throw their own characters down the tubes either and would rather continue getting a bit stronger first.


The other bit I don't get is the lack of empathy from the other characters. I mean I'm the secretly evil character and even I think now would be a good time to be kind to someone who went through that and yet the 'good' characters honestly couldn't care less that one of their group just saw everything they love burn, in person, and that's somewhat breaking my immersion too.

That supposedly the evillest character of the group is having the most 'good' reaction. Like seriously? How is the guy bent (secretly, only the DM knows) on world domination the only one with a shred of empathy?

This might explain the GM's reticence, they may simply not want to deal with all the drama your character has waiting in the wings right now. Dealing with your religion's collapse would probably result in your secret coming out and the game revolving even more around you than you currently want it to.

[ErebusVonMori]

Quite the opposite actually, world domination just got put on the back burner, and it's more that the rest of the party doesn't even regard it as a threat or see how he could regard it as a problem, and it's just baffling me. The expectations for my character simply don't fit into how I see things.

The other huge cause for schism that no one wants to address is that they saved my character against his will. There was a meteor storm spell inbound on the church and he had the chance to die keeping the main villain there and the party knocked him out and dragged him out denying him his martyrdom.

Now he's Jasidin so dying really isn't an issue from his perspective so that's got him peeved too.

[Psyren]

I'm not sure what other answer you could get here then. Talk to them and see if you can find out why they don't care. If you're lucky, the answer is "we'll get to it, just not right now." If you're unlucky, then retirement is probably the best option.

[ErebusVonMori]

That's very much my problem, that I don't see what else I could reasonably do. It's looking like I just have to retire the character.

[Blackhawk748]

I'd probably expect that too, but I wouldn't expect the entire party to drop everything they're doing right this minute and focus exclusively on my subplot.

Think about it, any baddie capable of nuking an entire religion is not the sort of opponent you rush off half-cocked to face. Maybe the party is apathetic, or maybe they just don't want to throw their own characters down the tubes either and would rather continue getting a bit stronger first.

I wouldnt expect it either, but it sounds like they dont care at all, like, even a little. Its like they are reacting to it raining. Now, this could be completely wrong but thats how im reading it.

[Psyren]

That's very much my problem, that I don't see what else I could reasonably do. It's looking like I just have to retire the character.

After you talk to them, feel free to post the results and we can go from there.


I wouldnt expect it either, but it sounds like they dont care at all, like, even a little. Its like they are reacting to it raining. Now, this could be completely wrong but thats how im reading it.

I get that, but right now we're only hearing one side of the story though.

[Trampaige]

s just baffling me. The expectations for my character simply don't fit into how I see things.

The other huge cause for schism that no one wants to address is that they saved my character against his will. There was a meteor storm spell inbound on the church and he had the chance to die keeping the main villain there and the party knocked him out and dragged him out denying him his martyrdom.

Now he's Jasidin so dying really isn't an issue from his perspective so that's got him peeved too.

Two ways to look at that is that they went full PvP to keep you from derailing the game.

Or they went full PvP to keep you from roleplaying your character.

Either way, it doesn't sound like it was discussed ahead of time? I probably would have included that in the original post. Your party dynamic is getting really jacked up. That really warranted a sizable discussion where you were an active party (eg, "Okay, it makes sense for you to save me, but *charname* is going to be really pissed off about you doing that and may not forgive you.")

I'd probably have lost interest in the game over what you've described so far.

[Tryxx]

So, if I'm reading this correctly, the main villain of your campaign destroyed a huge part of Wee Jas's (your character's deity) clergy, temple, and great deal of magical and religious resources and artifacts. And for some reason the rest of the party finds this a non-issue? Your vengeance is against the main villain of the campaign and your party doesn't want to pursue that?

I feel like we're missing something fundamental here.

A few questions:


Were the rest of the party and DM OK in the first place with you playing a "secretly evil" character in a party of good characters?
What was your in character relationship with the party prior to this? Them 'saving' you against your will doesn't tell me much, as that could still have been ignorant good intentions.
How do the 'good' characters feel about Wee Jas - and is she presented any differently than normal in your campaign world?

[ErebusVonMori]

She's presented normally, and my character's methodology for evil so far has been purely to do good deeds in the name of building public good will for his eventual attempt at high office. Noone had a problem with my being evil as long as I was subtle about it.

My relationship with the party was kinda awkward but mostly because of secrets I was being asked to keep IC by other party members and the DM

The only really significant difference for Wee Jas is that the Jasidin citadel was one of the three major sites of magical knowledge and artifacts, which for me makes things more confusing, someone just took out one of the three biggest armouries on the planet as their opening act and no one else is concerned. Even ignoring the personal aspect that should be huge.

Oh and the person who did it is claiming to be the first paladin (so blackguard) of the primeval god of literally all evil things, one of the two gods that started the universe. And we've a paladin in the party who apparently has bigger concerns apparently than this such as going back to his life a town guard.

The other huge thing that everyone else is completely unconcerned about, it was a very plot heavy session, is that the guy who did it ran it as a false flag operation to start a war and we're the last people alive who know and yet I'm the only one who wants to get the truth out and stop a pointless war. Literally asked for help to do this and got shot down and told that I was exaggerating the consequences. Like what other conclusion is there when you destroy a major religion whilst masquerading as another group?

[Tryxx]

Huh. Well, looks like the right answer is always going to be you're going to have to talk to the group.

Still, I'm curious what plot threads the rest are prioritizing over the main villain, and wondering if they're just metagaming and know you're not high enough level to take on the villain yet.

[A.A.King]

Obviously the first answer is talk about with the group away from the game (you don't want to have important discussions like when ppl want to actually play the game because then you might not have their full attention).

That being said, assumimg nothing changes than yes; I would retire the character. In general you have to do your best to stay with the party but at some point you can't do that without seriously changing the character. If you can't find a statisfying explanation as to why your character would continue on travelling with the group who first denied you your martyrdom and then won't allow you to follow up on a such a horrific event (from the character's perspective) than I would say don't force it. The game has to be fun for everyone but you are part of everyone.

Every character has some choices he or she just can't make. Every player should understand and accept that of the other players' characters

[Goaty14]

If you aren't good, then maybe become the deity? Just don't munchkin it too hard.

[ATHATH]

Maybe the rest of the party doesn't care about the destruction of the temple because they think that because Wee Jas is LN, bordering on LE, everyone in the temple was "evil" and thus deserve no mourning?

I dunno, I'm just trying to think of some semi-rational reasoning for ignoring a major campaign event.

[atemu1234]

I'm not seeing major issue here - if the DM didn't want the player(s) to react, he wouldn't have, y'know, destroyed everyone in his faith system.

[icefractal]

Yeah, the non-reaction is pretty bizarre. Like, even if the players didn't care about RP at all, and just wanted to get to the next adventure, you would think that an avatar of a primordial evil showing up, wiping out much of a major religion, and starting a war in the process would count as enough of a giant neon "Adventure This Way!" sign for even the most apathetic players.

Honestly, I'd be a bit suspicious that they dislike your character OOC and are trying to avoid giving him any spotlight.

And if the GM really is annoyed with you wanting vengeance (that one might be miscommunication), that's an even bigger WTF. What the hell would he expect you to do? Check if this is some kind of weird prank, maybe?

In any case, I feel like retiring the character probably makes the most sense, although it's still worth talking to the group OOC to find out if they have some kind of beef with you. As far as it being awkward with the McGuffin - this situation is entirely of the GM's making, he can handle it himself.

(Also, from a purely selfish view, I'm seriously curious WTH is going on with the rest of your group, so please post back here if you find out.)

[denthor]

Ok the paladin can not help. If he adventures with you he loses his paladinship. What are the rest of the players? You said good.

In my opinion the DM made a mistake allowing them to make a group with a paladin and an evil character. One of you has to go. The paladin is going back to gaurd duty. Did I get that right? If he is then in real life that is distance from your character maybe he rolls a new one


The party is trying to decide what they want to do.

[ErebusVonMori]

The paladin can't knowingly associate with evil. Undetectable alignment is a spell that exists and I've been meticulous in maintaining a good public face. This really really isn't my first rodeo. The first step on my plan for world domination involved a democratic vote to get me into power, as I said earlier.

We have a CE in the party as the paladin's 'charge' as part of a rehabilitation effort foisted upon him by his higher ups, so my alignment really really isn't the issue.


Edit: Wow I really hadn't thought about how complicated this all was until I typed it all out.

[Nifft]

Just a curious thought...

Is it possible that the players and DM expected you (the player) to be grateful that they saved your character from certain death?

And they're a bit offended that you're not meeting their expectation of gratefulness?

That might fit the observed behavior.

[denthor]

The paladin can't knowingly associate with evil. Undetectable alignment is a spell that exists and I've been meticulous in maintaining a good public face. This really really isn't my first rodeo. The first step on my plan for world domination involved a democratic vote to get me into power, as I said earlier.

We have a CE in the party as the paladin's 'charge' as part of a rehabilitation effort foisted upon him by his higher ups, so my alignment really really isn't the issue.


Edit: Wow I really hadn't thought about how complicated this all was until I typed it all out.

Your edit made me laugh. Most of us have sat at a table played in one form or another.

I one time sat in another room just listening to the players discussing a different game they were in. Even though I knew the terms understood it was a game. I was shocked by the way they spoke.

Try it sometime then roleplay as if you did not know it was a game.

Anyone would be surprised at the results. Even when you know the voices faces and names.

The imagine you have never played. Ask is it real based upon the conversation you can only hear.

[RoboEmperor]

I just do a 180 on the character personality with some dumb excuse like "The fiend that was possessing me was finally expunged."

Most importantly d&d is a game. Even if your PC would never adventure with a specific PC, you fudge it and adventure anyway to the DM doesn't pull his hair out. So if you have to break immersion to fix something, so be it.

For your specific case, I guess your cleric would finally calm down and realize vengeance accomplishes nothing and now is in search for a new purpose in life.

[Psyren]

For your specific case, I guess your cleric would finally calm down and realize vengeance accomplishes nothing and now is in search for a new purpose in life.

Or at least just chill out for a bit to keep the band together in the short term, and then bring the vengeance thing up again later in between plothooks. I mean Ao's sake, OP's character is planning freaking world domination, you'd think that would involve at least a little patience.

[icefractal]

I just do a 180 on the character personality with some dumb excuse like "The fiend that was possessing me was finally expunged."

Most importantly d&d is a game. Even if your PC would never adventure with a specific PC, you fudge it and adventure anyway to the DM doesn't pull his hair out. So if you have to break immersion to fix something, so be it.

For your specific case, I guess your cleric would finally calm down and realize vengeance accomplishes nothing and now is in search for a new purpose in life.Honest question, because I've seen this recommended before and it always puzzles me - what's the point of this?

Going with the flow, sure; it's the right move sometimes. But if you're dropping the character's personality entirely, why not just make a new character instead? Personally speaking, I'd /much/ rather play a character designed to fit in than a mangled version of one that doesn't.

[RoboEmperor]

Honest question, because I've seen this recommended before and it always puzzles me - what's the point of this?

Going with the flow, sure; it's the right move sometimes. But if you're dropping the character's personality entirely, why not just make a new character instead? Personally speaking, I'd /much/ rather play a character designed to fit in than a mangled version of one that doesn't.

Continuity. Maybe he is one of the 6 chosen ones and ditching him would horrendously violate the story. Maybe the player loves his character mechanically. If you're someone who doesn't give a **** about this type of stuff then sure, swap him out for a different character. If you do care about it, then do a 180 on the character instead of stubbornly sticking to your roleplay and ruining everyone's experience.

[Rynjin]

Continuity. Maybe he is one of the 6 chosen ones and ditching him would horrendously violate the story. Maybe the player loves his character mechanically. If you're someone who doesn't give a **** about this type of stuff then sure, swap him out for a different character. If you do care about it, then do a 180 on the character instead of stubbornly sticking to your roleplay and ruining everyone's experience.

Well hey, maybe the other players could make an effort to at least PRETEND they give half a **** about your character(/'s motivations) if that particular character being n the party is such a big deal. For that matter, were that an issue (which there's no indicator it is), maybe the GM should have thought about that conundrum before manufacturing such an extreme scenario affecting a particular character in the game, yes?

This isn't a matter of the OP "ruining everyone's experience" it's a matter of (with the information we have, anyway) the rest of the table's sheer APATHY over a major plot event that heavily affects his character. If he needs to do a 180 from a COMPLETELY reasonable reaction to this event to keep the game going, it's not a game worth playing in to start with.

[RoboEmperor]

Well hey, maybe the other players could make an effort to at least PRETEND they give half a **** about your character(/'s motivations) if that particular character being n the party is such a big deal. For that matter, were that an issue (which there's no indicator it is), maybe the GM should have thought about that conundrum before manufacturing such an extreme scenario affecting a particular character in the game, yes?

This isn't a matter of the OP "ruining everyone's experience" it's a matter of (with the information we have, anyway) the rest of the table's sheer APATHY over a major plot event that heavily affects his character. If he needs to do a 180 from a COMPLETELY reasonable reaction to this event to keep the game going, it's not a game worth playing in to start with.

I never said OP was. I play the strong silent type quite frequently. Some tables he was treated like a tsundere girl, was made fun of in and out of character, and everyone had a good time. In this one particular table however, everyone hated him saying his silence was antagonistic. In the latter case I should've done a 180 instead of stubbornly sticking to the strong silent type. Instead I left the table because the DM was a noob**** who thought blasters and healbots were mandatory entities in d&d and the best use of clerics and wizards. But if I did stick around I should've done a 180 with my character instead of yelling that other people should play better.

I was talking about general cases not the OP's specific case. In general if everyone has a problem with your character you change him.

I am looking at you Lawful Stupid. Goddamn paladins and clerics. Lawful Good should go die.

[Andry]

Man if all this happened in my group I would bail.

[King of Nowhere]

Except the DM specifically destroyed the majority of his religion, how else is a Cleric supposed to act? Hell i did that to a player i'd expect them to call for a flipping crusade on whoever did it.

How about rebuilding? your character could focus on recovering the lost ground. Proselityze, open temples, that kind of stuff. And you can do it while pursuing other adventures too. We have a character with a similar issue in our party (though his was on a much smaller scale and it was part of his backstory rather than something happening during the campaign) and while he's traveling with us he's preaching his religion to virtually any NPC that gives him a chance. You could do something like that.

[Yogibear41]

If the LG paladin isn't concerned that an ancient blackguard of the original evil deity just wiped out one of the biggest sites of power for a LN church full of artifacts, magic items, and who knows what else. He is an idiot. Just saying.

What else are the other players doing that's so important that this new ancient threat and likely the beginning of the end of all things isn't a high priority?

We can't save the world, we have to go do this random dungeon in the middle of nowhere, that will still be there in 10 years if we don't go do it today.

[ErebusVonMori]

The party's attitude is one of 'Hey you win some, you lose some, let's head home and have a few drinks and wait for the problem to get to us instead'

The other problem is that the god is very much a forgotten god, only two party members recognised it's name and the paladin regards other religions as a bunch of nonsense worshipping false idols so won't take our word for it. That's at least in character. Which is why the perspective I've been pushing once that failed to make any headway is one of "Someone just levelled one of the three largest stockpiles of magical power on the planet as their opening move!"

[Psyren]

The party's attitude is one of 'Hey you win some, you lose some, let's head home and have a few drinks and wait for the problem to get to us instead'

That sounds like they care a little bit, just not enough to leap into the problem with both feet.

Have you talked to them yet about how much this means to your character?



The other problem is that the god is very much a forgotten god, only two party members recognised it's name and the paladin regards other religions as a bunch of nonsense worshipping false idols so won't take our word for it. That's at least in character. Which is why the perspective I've been pushing once that failed to make any headway is one of "Someone just levelled one of the three largest stockpiles of magical power on the planet as their opening move!"

As long as you're still a cleric and can still do cleric-y things, how obscure your faith is shouldn't matter to them honestly.

[ArendK]

If the LG paladin isn't concerned that an ancient blackguard of the original evil deity just wiped out one of the biggest sites of power for a LN church full of artifacts, magic items, and who knows what else. He is an idiot. Just saying.

What else are the other players doing that's so important that this new ancient threat and likely the beginning of the end of all things isn't a high priority?

We can't save the world, we have to go do this random dungeon in the middle of nowhere, that will still be there in 10 years if we don't go do it today.

Yeah, I'm seeing a host of potential problems within this. Could be the group is RP lite and just focused on moving along. In game they should at least give you a "grieving period" in character if they are any semblance of friends. Alternatively, they may just not like your RP style. There's a lot of potential factors and the easiest solution is to just talk to them.

[ExLibrisMortis]

As long as you're still a cleric and can still do cleric-y things, how obscure your faith is shouldn't matter to them honestly.
I think that's the obscurity of the elder god of Evil he's talking about. Wee Jas is pretty clearly well-known, because they have that citadel (that the party was at, at some point), and a religion.

So basically, the party knows one of the three largest strategic reserves of power in the world has been destroyed, were in fact eye-witness to the attack and the last living beings to see the attacker, but none of them thinks they should do anything about it, and some don't even believe it was done by a primordial evil deity, despite two party members recognizing the name? Actually, it doesn't matter whether they recognize the name, because it was staged as false-flag operation, so they should at least recognize the false flag, right? And you're carrying a plot-critical artefact from this same reserve, that is presumably one of the last remaining, which should at least be motivation enough to get on with it and fight this blackguard (by proxy, if needed), but they want to go back to their job as town guard?

I don't get this party.

If all that's right, retire the character. Maybe retire the campaign, too.

[Psyren]

My bad, I misread the forgotten god as being the OP's patron rather than the one that did the deed.

[Blackhawk748]

The party's attitude is one of 'Hey you win some, you lose some, let's head home and have a few drinks and wait for the problem to get to us instead'

The other problem is that the god is very much a forgotten god, only two party members recognised it's name and the paladin regards other religions as a bunch of nonsense worshipping false idols so won't take our word for it. That's at least in character. Which is why the perspective I've been pushing once that failed to make any headway is one of "Someone just levelled one of the three largest stockpiles of magical power on the planet as their opening move!"

The more stuff you tell us the more i get confused. A Paladin, in a polytheistic setting, is acting like a monotheistic person. I mean, i could get thinking other religions are dumb and "dont have it right" but worshiping false idols? Dude, Wee Jaas is powering your cleric! How is she false?

[Captn_Flounder]

The more stuff you tell us the more i get confused. A Paladin, in a polytheistic setting, is acting like a monotheistic person. I mean, i could get thinking other religions are dumb and "dont have it right" but worshiping false idols? Dude, Wee Jaas is powering your cleric! How is she false?

Paladin players tend to have a more "Monotheistic" outlook. In my current game in which I am the DM, we also had an ancient aspect of death appear, and we have a LG Paladin (of Fortuna (treated as Tyche, just like the name better) of all things, though that doesn't really make sense at all) that tried to fist fight me IRL when he asked why Fortuna didn't just come down and one shot him. And when I tried to explain the difference between lesser dieties, greater dieties, and "those guys who are normally too powerful to even be concerned with the machinations of mortals and their gods unless something is really going screwy with the whole inter-planar wheels and cogs," he accused me of not knowing what the word "god" means. And then when I showed him the official stat block of Tyche by the book, he said those were dumb and that whoever wrote it is dumb.

I tried to explain that if every god was as powerful as Yahweh there wouldn't need to be more than one and they certainly wouldn't waste their time with mortals who offer them nothing, but he would have none of it.

Imagine his anger when he found out Fortuna and most of the Olympian council was wiped out a long time ago, and the great evil is only on the Prime Material Plane because he wants to be worshipped by the gods as the gods are by their precious mortals and forceful subjugation just wasn't cutting it. "Oh, those voices in your head in your backstory that convinced you to become a Paladin? There's your dose of realistic, Judeo-Christian religion in my fantasy!"

Their lack of imagination goes a long way towards deciding to be a Paladin, it seems.

[Blu]

Paladin players tend to have a more "Monotheistic" outlook. In my current game in which I am the DM, we also had an ancient aspect of death appear, and we have a LG Paladin (of Fortuna (treated as Tyche, just like the name better) of all things, though that doesn't really make sense at all) that tried to fist fight me IRL when he asked why Fortuna didn't just come down and one shot him. And when I tried to explain the difference between lesser dieties, greater dieties, and "those guys who are normally too powerful to even be concerned with the machinations of mortals and their gods unless something is really going screwy with the whole inter-planar wheels and cogs," he accused me of not knowing what the word "god" means. And then when I showed him the official stat block of Tyche by the book, he said those were dumb and that whoever wrote it is dumb.

Out of curiosity, is this guy still on your table? Because it seems a little too much, specially on the "fist fight me" part.




I don't get this party.

If all that's right, retire the character. Maybe retire the campaign, too.

Seconding this... try to talk to them, but by your descriptions things seem too weird and out of proportion that talking probably won't work...
And since your fun in the campaign is compromised anyway unless party puts even a little effort, wich they clearly don't look like they will, is probably just better to bail.

[ErebusVonMori]

Well got news back from the party rogue, his perspective is one of 'I'm a career thief and this is so far above my paygrade I'm just going to hide under my bed waiting for the end to come.'

The party druid doesn't like me IC for keeping secrets, which is hilarious as by Jasidin standards I've made a huge show of being open with information, the fact they even know I have the artefact was a huge show of trust.

Oh and the CE tiefling is currently trying to book travel to another plane.

My current plan is to just irritate the big bad with passive-aggressive Sendings as it seems to be the most I can do right now as I start putting together my own strategic reserve of magic, I know where an artefact is and I know what guards it, it's a lot stronger than I am but it's also underground and I just plan to roll in a number of barrels of gunpowder, blow it sky high then sift through the rubble.

Sending reads thus: 'This is your hourly reminder that you won't be getting any sleep tonight. You're welcome.'

[Psyren]

Well got news back from the party rogue, his perspective is one of 'I'm a career thief and this is so far above my paygrade I'm just going to hide under my bed waiting for the end to come.'

Called it (http://www.giantitp.com/forums/showthread.php?538800-Should-I-retire-the-character&p=22465275&viewfull=1#post22465275)



The party druid doesn't like me IC for keeping secrets, which is hilarious as by Jasidin standards I've made a huge show of being open with information, the fact they even know I have the artefact was a huge show of trust.

But you are hiding something, no? Maybe they got a whiff of it. Has the GM been letting them Sense Motive you/passing them notes?


My current plan is to just irritate the big bad with passive-aggressive Sendings as it seems to be the most I can do right now as I start putting together my own strategic reserve of magic, I know where an artefact is and I know what guards it, it's a lot stronger than I am but it's also underground and I just plan to roll in a number of barrels of gunpowder, blow it sky high then sift through the rubble.

Is it a major artifact? Because those typically only have one means of destruction (two if you count a lucky Disjunction.) Or are you merely blowing up the stuff around it?

Also, what about the paladin? (There was a paladin too right?)

[ErebusVonMori]

The paladin remains convinced that it isn't really a threat and that my religion is merely incompetent. And I want the artefact, I just can't bypass the guard alone by any means other than gross overkill and no one will help me.

And they can suspect all they want, they don't know I'm hiding anything and I have been very open with them.

And it's not that they're panicking that's the issue, it's that they're panicking whilst telling my character he's grossly exaggerating the issue. Pick one.

[Quertus]

I'm glad that you're resolving this in a better and simultaneously more explosive manner than I had thought possible.

I was going to suggest OOC conversations, and either retcon your character's death, or "retire" the character to a solo game while creating a new character, but I like your "take charge with liberal use of explosives" approach.

Oh, and what about the GM? Why the **** is he upset at your character's perfectly natural reaction to the plot that he created?

Lastly, how are you managing sending once an hour a) to keep someone from sleeping to regain spells b) while yourself resting to remember spells?

[ErebusVonMori]

An artificer owes me a favour, I'm having a staff of Sending made, frankly it's the best thing I can do right now as the blackguard is much stronger than we are so direct confrontation is a huge nope, we fought him when he had used most of his item charges, spells and smites on the High Priest and retinue, he's six levels above us (minimum).

[ericgrau]

In character you can still have a strong desire for vengeance and yet be unable to act on it. Happens all the time in stories. Then you cooperate fully with the party until you finally get your opportunity. After all buddies make vengeance easier. So you do what they want even when it isn't always vengeance related. Then if you get the opportunity for vengeance you take it if convenient. Or if you see a way to solo the opportunity when the party wants to go another way, THEN you leave the party.

Happens to even the most evil vengeful / self centered guys in stories. Just try to be less 2 dimensional about it.

But if you can't do that then yeah just leave the party. Say he went his own way to seek vengeance.

[ErebusVonMori]

Except their response to an apocalypse grade threat is to ignore it and hope it goes away, not prepare for it, train hard, find out more about it, just hope it doesn't come for them and carry on as if nothing's changed. Except for the rogue and warlock who are fleeing in terror, but the rest of the party is very blasé about it.

I've never said let's go fight it right now, I've said let's arm up, warn everyone (which they also don't want to do) and when it makes its next move we'll be ready.

[denthor]

Your party is overwhelmed. Which explains the inaction. The DM now needs to give them hope. Find support within the Wee Jass society prove they have enough support to do the job. You maybe evil but not all of them are. Get a party of NPC clerics to give healing then head out. Enlist help from bacob priest. Then also request Pelor help with magic items . You are evil they may not want to be seen in public with you. But they will help to put an ancient evil back in the shadows.

Do you have a name for thus black gaurd?

[ErebusVonMori]

Again no one knows my alignment, first spell I cast every day is undetectable alignment and I'm made a point of 'out-gooding' the paladin. As far as anyone's concerned IC I'm LG with a really big G

[noce]

You're pretending to be LG but you're not, so set up a LE plan.

1. Assassinate the Paladin. When he sleeps. Make him suffer.
2. Produce false evidences that make your party believe the Blackguard did this. Knowledge (religions) helps in this case, you could for example draw the holy symbol of the Evil Forgotten God on the paladin forehead with a dagger.
3. Make them believe he killed the Paladin not only because he was underestimating the Blackguard, but because he also didn't recognise the power and authority of the Evil Forgotten God. So he deserved it, plus it will be a warning to others. This can be accomplished with a letter next to the body, you could place that holy symbol on the letter, but the forehead is cooler.
4. Find an alibi for yourself for that night. For example, find a street criminal and give him a hat of disguise as a gift. Tell him to impersonate you somewhere you think appropriate and tell him you'll pay him 1000 bucks the sequent day if he does.
5. Now, if everything goes as you planned, they do not have any suspect that you did this AND they cannot ignore the problem anymore. Plus, the paladin is finally dead.

If this doesn't work, your current character gets a big, dramatic exit and you get to build a new one as a result.
Plus, the paladin is finally dead. He just deserves it so much.

[denthor]

Again no one knows my alignment, first spell I cast every day is undetectable alignment and I'm made a point of 'out-gooding' the paladin. As far as anyone's concerned IC I'm LG with a really big G

OK who cares oh yeah the neutral good Pelor clerics that will detect alignment. Neural? Wee Jass is lawful. There is no law in my detect alignment? That is curious. Detect magic... there is a low level (what ever school set the obscure alignment spell is) what is going on here?

He is under a white flag of truce so we will give a hearing.

You complain that nobody wants to help. That Is An Evil Complaint all the time. Your druid is suspicious of you. You completely missed the point of the suggestion so I will type again







FIND HELP FROM OTHER ORGANIZATIONS.

The response above the capital letters is garbage only the capital letters mean anything. Your campaign world is not a you against them (them being all planes of existence ) with only your party. To balance the scale. There are other adventuring groups I count nine sides at least.


Oh and noce. A dead paladin is a good and happy paladin.

I approve of your plan but he still needs help so do it after he secures it.

[ErebusVonMori]

Okay well ignoring the dumbest plan I've ever heard, seriously what the hell was that nonsense?

The party doesn't want to help so murder them? Seriously?

And you are forgetting that detect evil doesn't tell them my alignment, just that I don't register as evil. My actions tell them I'm LG.

Also how the hell is 'Noone Wants to Help' an evil complaint? If this kind of nonsensical, you're evil so you must... idiocy continues I'll try to summon Red Fel and find out what the actual LE solution is.

Red Fel
Red Fel
Red Fel

[ATHATH]

Okay well ignoring the dumbest plan I've ever heard, seriously what the hell was that nonsense?

The party doesn't want to help so murder them? Seriously?

And you are forgetting that detect evil doesn't tell them my alignment, just that I don't register as evil. My actions tell them I'm LG.

Also how the hell is 'Noone Wants to Help' an evil complaint? If this kind of nonsensical, you're evil so you must... idiocy continues I'll try to summon Red Fel and find out what the actual LE solution is.

Red Fel
Red Fel
Red Fel
The idea of the "kill the Paladin in his sleep" plan is to instill fear/a desire for revenge/a desire for vengeance in the party by killing someone close to them (in this case, the Paladin) and pinning the blame on the Blackguard. You don't have to use the Paladin as your sacrificial lamb; you could use a beloved NPC cohort, familiar, animal companion, etc. instead. Bonus points for casting Animate Dread Warrior or the like on the killed NPC (make sure that you're disguised as the Blackguard when you kill them) so that you don't lose allies.

I think what denthor is trying to say is that they might not just cast Detect Evil on you; they might cast Detect Magic, Detect Law, etc. on you as well. Personally, I don't think that they will, but I just wanted to make his argument clear.

denthor's second point, getting help from outside of the party, while presented in the wrong way, still has the right idea at its core. If your party isn't willing to help you, just do the job/get your revenge without them. Gather a squad/army of priests and scholars that are outraged at the fact that this Blackguard just razed a major religious site and collection of knowledge and is threatening the safety of the world, teleport into the Blackguard's sanctuary, and tear him (the Blackguard) to shreds. Heck, you could probably do that on your own. You're a Cleric, for Pete's sake; just buff yourself out of the wazoo, teleport in, spam OP spells at the Blackguard until he falls over dead, is mind-controlled, explodes, etc., and teleport back out again. Or, if you don't want to risk your life, just use Planar Ally to call in some extraplanar servants of Wee Jas, which I'm sure will be plenty angry at this Blackguard just razed a temple to their goddess.

Then get back to whatever the rest of the party is so preoccupied with, since the rest of your group (including the DM, apparently) seems to dislike/be tired of this subplot.

[denthor]

What is wrong with getting help?

I said you would come up as neutral not evil,good,lawful or chaotic. But the diety you are a representative of is based in law. So the clerics are:

Lawful (good ,neutral or evil)

The yellow robed Pelor clerics are:

(Neutral, lawful or chaotic) good.


Purple robe bacobs are Nuetral (lawful, chaotic, good, evil or just plain Nuetral )

Anything else is suspicious.

As far as murdering a paladin to me that is always a viable plan I personally find the class distasteful. Will run one but the century has not past yet.

GETTING HELP IS NOT A GOOD PLAN. WHY?

[ATHATH]

What is wrong with getting help?

I said you would come up as neutral not evil,good,lawful or chaotic. But the diety you are a representative of is based in law. So the clerics are:

Lawful (good ,neutral or evil)

The yellow robed Pelor clerics are:

(Neutral, lawful or chaotic) good.


Purple robe bacobs are Nuetral (lawful, chaotic, good, evil or just plain Nuetral )

Anything else is suspicious.

As far as murdering a paladin to me that is always a viable plan I personally find the class distasteful. Will run one but the century has not past yet.

GETTING HELP IS NOT A GOOD PLAN. WHY?
denthor...

You're not really helping (y)our case here, buddy.

Let's just wait for Red Fel to arrive and sort this all out, okay?

[noce]

Okay well ignoring the dumbest plan I've ever heard, seriously what the hell was that nonsense?

The party doesn't want to help so murder them? Seriously?

I wrote that post ironically on purpose, obviously not every evil person is a murderhobo.
But think about it: do you care more about your God, your religion magical artifacts, all that magical knowledge, you plan to rule the world...or do you care more about a random town guard that does not believe you just because you worship another deity and doesn't care of the entire world is destroyed.

You don't have to kill them, but you don't have to follow them and be loyal to them just because they're PCs.
Maybe you care a lot about your friends, but this doesn't mean your PC has to care about the party.

[ATHATH]

Maybe you care a lot about your friends, but this doesn't mean your have to PC care about the party.
The problem with that philosophy, of course, is that not caring about the rest of the PCs tends to result in a splitting of the party.

Sure, my plan does as well, but it should only split you off from the rest of the party for a single session, tops. Heck, said session could probably just be a solo session with your DM. If you kill the Blackguard, the situation is resolved and you can get back to adventuring (and the party split is thus healed). If you fail to kill the Blackguard, you're character has probably died, and you can make a new one that has a better motivation to stick with the party (which also heals the party split).

[Psyren]

Maybe you care a lot about your friends, but this doesn't mean your PC has to care about the party.

That will just lead to retiring the character anyway though; it's not like he can split off from the DM.

[Blue Jay]

The problem with that philosophy, of course, is that not caring about the rest of the PCs tends to result in a splitting of the party.

...not to mention that it has a high potential to escalate an OOC conflict. Clearly, Erebus doesn't want to escalate anything, as evidenced by the fact that he's here asking for advice on how to play his character without ruining everyone's experience.

I'm going to second ATHATH's idea: if you can make a special request to treat your character's drama like a side quest (even if it's just a solo side quest), that might be a good compromise. Otherwise, it sounds like a problem that should be resolved OOC through conversation, as has been suggested already.

[AnimeTheCat]

The problem with that philosophy, of course, is that not caring about the rest of the PCs tends to result in a splitting of the party.

Sure, my plan does as well, but it should only split you off from the rest of the party for a single session, tops. Heck, said session could probably just be a solo session with your DM. If you kill the Blackguard, the situation is resolved and you can get back to adventuring (and the party split is thus healed). If you fail to kill the Blackguard, you're character has probably died, and you can make a new one that has a better motivation to stick with the party (which also heals the party split).

I like this idead. +1 to this. It is the closest thing to making everyone happy without bending anyone to anyone elses will or forcing anyone else (other that NPCs) to do something.

[Red Fel]

If this kind of nonsensical, you're evil so you must... idiocy continues I'll try to summon Red Fel and find out what the actual LE solution is.

Yo.


denthor...

You're not really helping (y)our case here, buddy.

Let's just wait for Red Fel to arrive and sort this all out, okay?

He's here. Tired, and cranky, but here. Let's see.


I'm in a game where my cleric's religion just get decimated by an outside force and my character is currently going though a break down after watching his equivalent of the Pope and the Vatican get levelled along with centuries of magical knowledge (He's Jasidin so that hurts a lot too.)

Now the other players apparently aren't liking his burning drive for vengeance and his anger at their lack of concern so do I retire the character as the other players aren't enjoying their presence anymore?

Uh-huh.


Problem is the DM seems to resent my character's desire for vengeance and I simply don't see how else I could react.

Neat.


Problem is that everyone else I'm told actively dislikes the character development, and the problem with retiring the character is that he's got an artefact of his church that's giving us a lot of the plot. But I genuinely don't see how else my LE cleric could react in any other way and people don't like that reaction.

I feel like I'm being shoehorned into a position and then criticised for it.

Yup.

Okay, so, in reading over the thread, I still have one question that burns in an indecent way I should really have a doctor examine: Have you spoken to the DM about this? It sounds like part of your frustration comes from the DM putting your character into a position you feel mandates a course of action, and you further feeling like neither the DM nor the party supports you. If the DM doesn't support you, it's time to retire the character. It is never a good time when you play a character concept the DM doesn't support; it's not going to work out great for you. I don't always fault the player for this - sometimes it's the DM's fault for being a chump - but it is what it is.

You post a lot of other stuff, and it sounds like the rest of the party cares less about your character and his motivations, and more about the fact that you lied to them, which is - and if you're calling me, you've hopefully been paying attention when I say this - on you, chief. You either (1) don't lie to the party about what you are, and let them reach their own decisions about you, or (2) lie your worthless mortal backside off, until it's like breathing, and don't take advantage of any excuse to reveal the truth to anyone living or dead. You chose option C, which is not an option I listed because people don't like being told they've been lied to. So let's skip that.

So, what do you do now? Well, sounds like the party either hates you or is in hiding, and - absent explicit confirmation from the DM - it seems probable that the DM's not a fan either. As to the original question, the correct answer is, "Know what? Yeah. Give this character one hell of a send-off, maybe turn him into an NPC." Have an aside with your DM about this character going on a rage-bender, ditching the party and becoming the new Scourge of God. Have it be a thing. Get the DM pumped. Give your PC a blowout worthy of his loss.

Then get on with your life.

Fact is, I'm only going off of what I've heard from you. It's possible the party has no beef with you because your character is being super NOBODY UNDERSTANDS MY PAIN emo about his loss. It's possible they don't care because they don't know. It's possible the DM is waiting for you to be proactive about this. I don't know, some judge said I'm not allowed to read minds anymore, so I'm guessing. Point is, unless you talk it out OOCly with everyone involved, it's all guess-work, and if your guess is that the PCs don't like you and the DM's not a fan, time to retire. Do it with a bang.

Alternatively, Henderson the plot. Because deep down we're all monsters.

[Blackhawk748]

Paladin players tend to have a more "Monotheistic" outlook. In my current game in which I am the DM, we also had an ancient aspect of death appear, and we have a LG Paladin (of Fortuna (treated as Tyche, just like the name better) of all things, though that doesn't really make sense at all) that tried to fist fight me IRL when he asked why Fortuna didn't just come down and one shot him. And when I tried to explain the difference between lesser dieties, greater dieties, and "those guys who are normally too powerful to even be concerned with the machinations of mortals and their gods unless something is really going screwy with the whole inter-planar wheels and cogs," he accused me of not knowing what the word "god" means. And then when I showed him the official stat block of Tyche by the book, he said those were dumb and that whoever wrote it is dumb.

I tried to explain that if every god was as powerful as Yahweh there wouldn't need to be more than one and they certainly wouldn't waste their time with mortals who offer them nothing, but he would have none of it.

Imagine his anger when he found out Fortuna and most of the Olympian council was wiped out a long time ago, and the great evil is only on the Prime Material Plane because he wants to be worshipped by the gods as the gods are by their precious mortals and forceful subjugation just wasn't cutting it. "Oh, those voices in your head in your backstory that convinced you to become a Paladin? There's your dose of realistic, Judeo-Christian religion in my fantasy!"

Their lack of imagination goes a long way towards deciding to be a Paladin, it seems.

You have a very strange Paladin player. Then again whenever someone plays a Paladin at my table they arent the Paladin of a god.


Except their response to an apocalypse grade threat is to ignore it and hope it goes away, not prepare for it, train hard, find out more about it, just hope it doesn't come for them and carry on as if nothing's changed. Except for the rogue and warlock who are fleeing in terror, but the rest of the party is very blasé about it.

I've never said let's go fight it right now, I've said let's arm up, warn everyone (which they also don't want to do) and when it makes its next move we'll be ready.

Your Paladin is bad at his job.


Alternatively, Henderson the plot. Because deep down we're all monsters.

I usually dont support this, but some DMs are just asking for it (and no i dont think this is one of those times)

[denthor]

Now you see why I lean Cg red fel being a middle manager in where you make you hot home is not a real good place but at least you have job stability.

Thank you. I am a bit surprised you did not give a speech about how I should just tarnish the paladin how I opt to just eliminate him. I feel your rubbing off on me.

[Quertus]

Okay well ignoring the dumbest plan I've ever heard, seriously what the hell was that nonsense?

The party doesn't want to help so murder them? Seriously?

The plan isn't as dumb as it sounds, sadly. It's actually just business. If you can't get everyone onboard with the plan, just fire them / transfer them to a different department / otherwise remove them from consideration.

Think about it - you're looking at doing the same thing, by removing your character from the party. Why is the opposite so strange?

EDIT: I'm not actually advocating the plan, merely explaining that there is a kernel of wisdom buried therein.

[Nifft]

I do like the idea that you were with them only because they were helpful for your LE goals, and now that they've show their true color ("the color of chicken**** cowardice") you will kill them and take their stuff, and then re-animate their bodies as vampires to serve your will.

Bonus! They all get the Vampire template.

[ATHATH]

I do like the idea that you were with them only because they were helpful for your LE goals, and now that they've show their true color ("the color of chicken**** cowardice") you will kill them and take their stuff, and then re-animate their bodies as vampires to serve your will.

Bonus! They all get the Vampire template.
The Vampire template has way too much LA. If you do decide to turn on your party and raise them as undead once they're dead, I recommend turning them into obscure, intelligent undead from the Collection of Necromantic Oddities (http://bg-archive.minmaxforum.com/index.php?topic=181.0). If nothing in particular fits for a certain party member, I suggest casting Animate Dread Warrior on them.

[Peat]

I still don't quite understand the situation here. I mean, I understand everything that's been said, just there's big missing connections in terms of motivations. Sometimes it sounds like this is a really RP heavy campaign and people are butting heads because of that, sometimes it sounds like most of the group doesn't really care about that angle. I don't really get what the GM wants either. My guess is he's just lobbing metaphorical grenades at the group to make them move but doesn't want dissent within the group and/or players to really grab the plot and run with it. This is something you really need to nail down, what the hell the GM is expecting from all of this.

[noce]

I think the DM is affected by the railroad syndrome.
He either doesn't want you to mess with the plot because he wants things to go that way, or he just knows the plot WILL go that way and doesn't want the party to split for things that are beyond your reach.

[ErebusVonMori]

Well seems God has spoken.

Edit: The DM currently doesn't want to talk about it, but basically we've been antagonistic ever since we had the 'dealmaking demigod' session and I figured out his plan and undermined it. That's one of the major problems he has, I keep figuring out the plot several steps ahead and planning accordingly, nuking the Jasidin citadel was the first time I'd been caught offguard since session two.

[Sinewmire]

If it were me I would:

A) Suck it up and accept the party and DM aren't going with it right now. Have my character (after a brief period of venting) accept he cannot solve this just now. The antipaladin is too powerful, and trying to go up against him alone is suicide and also certain to fail. Lots of people have massive crushing problems that they cannot immediately solve - it'll be interesting roleplay.

B) Work with the party to seek out a means of defeating this antipaladin - an artifact, a Wish, or something else that will require encounters and therefore XP and will likely relate to whatever the GM has in mind for you.

C) Work on convincing the party that they should help over the course of several sessions. Discuss why Antipaladins are bad and should be stopped with the Paladin. Work on emboldening the Warlock and Rogue so they are surer of their abilities (buff spells on them should help) and happier with taking out this dude. become Mr Team Player.

D) Adventure some.

E) Absolutely do not murder the paladin, no matter how much he deserves it. They will know it was you (the suspicious person in the party) and it will likely cause resentment with the other players.

It's a pain in the fundament, but the result should be 1) The others enjoy working with you, used to your buff spells and helpfulness and will be more likely to help you 2) You're all are stronger and more confident in fighting that Antipaladin and 3) Nobody gets butthurt.

Of course, that's what *I* would do in your position I don't know if that will map 100% to *your* experience. Maybe murdering them all in their dreamless sleep wouldsuit your group better. :smallwink:

[noce]

E) Absolutely do not murder the paladin, no matter how much he deserves it.

Awww :frown:

[Sinewmire]

Awww :frown:

For the good of the party!
Oh, when I think of the paladins that I could have murdered.... :smallfrown:

...but no! :smallannoyed:

[Red Fel]

Well seems God has spoken.

Edit: The DM currently doesn't want to talk about it, but basically we've been antagonistic ever since we had the 'dealmaking demigod' session and I figured out his plan and undermined it. That's one of the major problems he has, I keep figuring out the plot several steps ahead and planning accordingly, nuking the Jasidin citadel was the first time I'd been caught offguard since session two.

Okay. Now we're talking.

So, here's the new burning rash question: Does the DM not wanting to talk about it mean that he doesn't want to talk right now, or that he doesn't want to talk, period? The former could mean any number of things, the latter generally suggests bad blood.

And here's the thing - bad blood won't go away if you retire the character.

It sounds like there's bad blood, from what you describe. That's not grounds for retiring the character, that's grounds for retiring period - if there are unresolved OOC issues between player and DM, it's not going to end well for player. I'm not putting this on you or on the DM - strike that, I'm putting it on you for undermining the DM's plans instead of talking to him about them, because I'm judgmental and militant about it - but once that damage is out there, you've got to resolve it before play can be fun for everybody. And if your DM isn't in the mood to talk, that's really not conducive to resolving the issue.

Right now, you have to decide if this can be resolved, and if it's worth it to you to do so. If the answer to both is yes, you need to reach out to this DM, not about this specific plot point, but about the bad blood, generally, and try to reach a common ground. Offer to be less of a Henderson if he's willing to be less of a railroad conductor. Make peace. If that works, you may not need to retire the character at all. If it doesn't, there's very little you can do to ensure that a new character won't meet the same fate.

Oh, and Denthor, I don't generally tarnish or eliminate Paladins. I find that keeping them around as a foil is a great way of ensuring that people pick the path of wickedness over the path of righteousness any day of the week.

My way or the "High" way, indeed.

[ErebusVonMori]

Thank you great sage, but I'm afraid I didn't even know I was undermining him at the time, it all seemed kind of obvious that he was trying to trick us into releasing him from the binding he was under, it never occurred to me this wasn't something we weren't meant to know.

Edit: That also is indeed my reason for keeping a paladin around, to make me look better.

[Psyren]

Whether you did it knowingly or not, he might still hold a grudge about it. So the advice most people have been giving you stands, talk to your DM.

[ErebusVonMori]

His problem is that he refuses to guide me OOC, and IC won't use the levers I've very openly given him. I'm part of a rather militant church so, as I've told him repeatedly, he can just have one of my superiors give me an order and I'll follow it.

[Chronikoce]

I think the chat with the DM in the case needs to be about how to return the relationship between you as a player and him as a DM back to friendly terms. Trying to sort DM to character problems ooc won't help if you don't first resolve DM to player problems.

[AnimeTheCat]

Like Red Fel said, I think there's some bad blood here. And the unfortunate thing about bad blood is that it doesn't have anything to do with your character anymore, it's at you the player. I would highly highly reccomend talking to the DM out of game, out of character, about not the game and not the character. It's not about restoring balance within the game anymore, it's about preserving balance between your real life human connection.

[Blackhawk748]

Well seems God has spoken.

Edit: The DM currently doesn't want to talk about it, but basically we've been antagonistic ever since we had the 'dealmaking demigod' session and I figured out his plan and undermined it. That's one of the major problems he has, I keep figuring out the plot several steps ahead and planning accordingly, nuking the Jasidin citadel was the first time I'd been caught offguard since session two.

Hes pissed because hes telegraphing the plot from last week? Wow that seems petty.


strike that, I'm putting it on you for undermining the DM's plans instead of talking to him about them, because I'm judgmental and militant about it

Gonna disagree with you on this. Hes not undermining the DMs plans if he figured them out in game. If that happens the DM just has to kinda suck it up. God knows my party has figured out my plans before.

Also to everyone reccomending he talks to his DM, his DM has said he doesnt want to talk about it, if thats the stance hes taking hes backing OP into a corner, whch really just leaves waking out. Hopefully he talks about it with you later.

[Psyren]

Also to everyone reccomending he talks to his DM, his DM has said he doesnt want to talk about it, if thats the stance hes taking hes backing OP into a corner, whch really just leaves waking out. Hopefully he talks about it with you later.

The assumption is that "I don't want to talk about it" is not the alpha and omega of their interactions. Basically, if either of them values the friendship, bring it up again and resolve it (like grown-ups.)

And if one or both of them doesn't, well, problem solved (in a different way.)

[ATHATH]

whch really just leaves waking out.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3YxaaGgTQYM

[ATHATH]

The assumption is that "I don't want to talk about it" is not the alpha and omega of their interactions. Basically, if either of them values the friendship, bring it up again and resolve it (like grown-ups.)

And if one or both of them doesn't, well, problem solved (in a different way.)
I thought that the DM just didn't want to talk about their game-related problems, not necessarily about the bad blood between the DM and the OP.

[Solaris]

Thank you great sage, but I'm afraid I didn't even know I was undermining him at the time, it all seemed kind of obvious that he was trying to trick us into releasing him from the binding he was under, it never occurred to me this wasn't something we weren't meant to know.

That's the problem with simpletons. They dislike it when you make it obvious that their cunning machinations and subtle clues are neither.

From what I'm reading, the party's really not interested in dealing with the apocalyptic villain for reasons that range from the pragmatic to the astonishingly, stupidly out of character. That's okay. Not every group wants to be the heroes. Some groups just want to stand on the sidelines and applaud while the real heroes get things done.

Well, you've got three choices with that. The first choice, you can retire the character. The second choice, you can bend your character to suit the group. The third choice, you can dip out because the group's not playing the way you're wanting to play, and I never manipulate a group's thinking for free.

Retiring the character, someone upthread mentioned going out with a bang. Pull out all the brakes and show just what your class is capable of. I like that idea, but only because I'm petty and think it would drive your DM nuts to kill his precious villain. I mean, the guy's douche enough to get upset because you picked up his 'subtle' machinations and reacted accordingly, he deserves what he gets.

Second choice, you don't need to pursue vengeance right now. Get some more levels. Give the DM the chance to not be a baboon and show the party that yeah, you were right and they should have dealt with the problem before it metastasized into an apocalypse. Maybe go wipe out some goblin villages or something in the meantime, do some stuff to work on your original goal of world domination through popularity. Think of this as an opportunity to rebuild the church of Wee Jas the right way, and you'll deal with that upstart blackguard when the time's right. The time, unfortunately, may not be right until the epilogue.

Third choice... it's sounding like you want to Roleplay dealing with the big dramatic stuff, and they don't. You want to deal with a world-ender before it ends the world (a reasonable conclusion, but keep in mind that the DM has not demonstrated himself to be terribly reasonable), they want to knock off goblin villagers and plunder ruins. If the playstyles aren't compatible, they're not compatible. Nothing good comes from forcing the issue.

[Psyren]

I thought that the DM just didn't want to talk about their game-related problems, not necessarily about the bad blood between the DM and the OP.

Either one, they're going to have to discuss it eventually. It won't magically fix itself.

[Peat]

Again, I feel like I'm missing something here, but if there's a problem and the GM doesn't want to talk about it, like period nope never talking about it don't want to talk about it... then that sounds like a cue to leave the game. Like, not retire the character, or change the mindset, but straight up walk. Life is too short to hang out in games where the GM is not interested in settling problems.

I feel a bit bad about giving this advice, because what if I'm missing something and that things aren't that bad? But its what I'd do in the situation you describe.

If you're enjoying the game, or want to stick for social reasons, or whatever, then retire the character or arrange for a solo adventure, or anything that breaks the situation and keep on enjoying it. I don't want people to stop playing games they enjoy or lose friends they like.

But a GM that doesn't want to talk game issues? That sucks and really cuts down OP's options to roll with it or walk.

[ErebusVonMori]

Well we're now deep in downtime and I've split off from the party to try and deal with all the various plot threads currently dangling loose in the wind on my own. And there's a lot of them, not just the Citadel stuff, but a sacrificial cult operated by some kind of serial reincarnator/body swapper that I've already put down twice. A second apocalypse grade threat that's been looming for quite some time. A demon summoning that released a nebulous something into the world. And no one else wants to handle it. Gonna be tough.

For an LE character I seem to spend a lot of my time stopping the entire world falling apart

[Red Fel]

For an LE character I seem to spend a lot of my top stopping the entire world falling apart

Why so surprised? We're both the best at it and the most motivated.

We're the best because there is literally nothing we won't do to succeed.

We're motivated because it's hard to rule over a world that's been destroyed.

Welcome to the team. You'll be receiving your complimentary fruit basket in the mail shortly.

[ErebusVonMori]

Why so surprised? We're both the best at it and the most motivated.

We're the best because there is literally nothing we won't do to succeed.

We're motivated because it's hard to rule over a world that's been destroyed.

Welcome to the team. You'll be receiving your complimentary fruit basket in the mail shortly.

Note to self, hire food taster immediately.

[ErebusVonMori]

Well downtime is going tolerably at the moment, I've hurried ahead of the party and come across a disease that targets Jasidin priests first.

[ErebusVonMori]

Oh hallelujah, finally the DM has actually grabbed one of those handy methods of directing my character I've left lying just about everywhere. My deity made a personal appearance to tell me to rejoin the group, it's a touch heavier handed than I'd have liked, but fine, good solid in character reason

[ATHATH]

Oh hallelujah, finally the DM has actually grabbed one of those handy methods of directing my character I've left lying just about everywhere. My deity made a personal appearance to tell me to rejoin the group, it's a touch heavier handed than I'd have liked, but fine, good solid in character reason
Huzzah!

((Stupid minimum character limit...))