Tips for concealing class and alignment in a party with a paladin?

[MonkeySage]

The character is an evil halfling cleric intent on becoming a lich; he dabbles in banking to help fund his research.

Hypothetically, the party he's joining has a paladin. He wants to conceal both his alignment and his class. He's not the best fighter, but he's charismatic, smart, and wise. He's also fairly agile. He wears leather armor and uses a longspear in combat.

Domains are Death and Souls.

[AMFV]

The character is an evil halfling cleric intent on becoming a lich; he dabbles in banking to help fund his research.

Hypothetically, the party he's joining has a paladin. He wants to conceal both his alignment and his class. He's not the best fighter, but he's charismatic, smart, and wise. He's also fairly agile. He wears leather armor and uses a longspear in combat.

Domains are Death and Souls.

Depends what edition... In 3.5 Undetectable Alignment is a relatively low level spell, and lasts all day. And at mid-level you should be able to get an item that manages it. Hiding your class would be probably a bluff or disguise check. If you're casting spells (in 3.5) that becomes very tricky but is also possible.

In other games and editions the rules and tricks would be very different.

[Pex]

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tsXEToflqGs

[CharonsHelper]

Frankly - putting a character who is THAT evil (becoming a Lich is capital 'B' Bad News) in a party with a paladin sounds like you're just asking for all sorts of in-party crap to hit the proverbial fan.

I recommend against making the attempt of this party combination.

[Jay R]

Agreed. Building a party is a group endeavor, at least to some extent. Make characters that fit with each other.

[AMFV]

Frankly - putting a character who is THAT evil (becoming a Lich is capital 'B' Bad News) in a party with a paladin sounds like you're just asking for all sorts of in-party crap to hit the proverbial fan.

I recommend against making the attempt of this party combination.

It's only crap hitting the fan when and if he becomes a Lich. Otherwise it's just a mildly unsavory nerdy guy doing research. The alignment issue is only an issue if the Paladin knows he's evil (which with undetectable alignment, he won't). And the Cleric seems like the sneaky type. Frankly a sneaky evil type is more likely to get along with a Paladin than an openly chaotic type. Yes, if it's ever realized it'll be an issue, but the Paladin isn't going to have the knowledge skills to really figure it out, or really the sense motive to beat a focused bluff character.

This is something that could certainly be workable, if planned properly. And it seems that he is taking the effort to plan it.

Agreed. Building a party is a group endeavor, at least to some extent. Make characters that fit with each other.

Why? There's no rule that everybody has to have the same outlook. As long as their goals are compatible (at least the short term ones), they'll have a reason to be together. And the evil one will have a reason to keep his evil in check to stay hidden. It looks like they're trying to avoid PvP but still have complex characters, that's certainly a workable thing.

[GorinichSerpant]

Do you know the Paladin's player? Do you know how they would react as a player to your character? On one extreme, some people take these things like a personal offense, on another some people would laugh-off their character being backstabbed by a supposed friend or savour the story twist. Depending on the attitude of the people of at the table this could either lead to horrible drama between the players or a enjoyable experience while the characters are dealing with drama.

[CharonsHelper]

It looks like they're trying to avoid PvP but still have complex characters, that's certainly a workable thing.

That makes it sound like you can't have complex characters who, as a group, genuinely like each-other & get along well.

[AMFV]

That makes it sound like you can't have complex characters who, as a group, genuinely like each-other & get along well.

Fair enough, I can see that it might read that way. Wasn't my intention. Both are equally viable things. But to imply that creating a character who has goals contrary to another character's goals, is going to ruin a campaign, seems a stretch. They need only have the same large scale goals, small goals are quite easy.

[Jay R]

It's only crap hitting the fan when and if he becomes a Lich. Otherwise it's just a mildly unsavory nerdy guy doing research. The alignment issue is only an issue if the Paladin knows he's evil (which with undetectable alignment, he won't).

In my experience, you cannot count on keeping a secret from another player permanently.

I have enjoyed having secrets from the rest of the party. In a game set in the Old West, I announced that I was going to base my character on a favorite western TV show. And then I showed up with a Ca Li Yang, Chinese martial artist that everybody recognized as Kwai-Chang Caine from Kung Fu.

After a few sessions, when the situation called for it, my character washed off his make-up and introduced himself as Cal Young, a federal agent disguise artist based on Artemus Gordon from The Wild, Wild West.

It was fun, but the eventual and inevitable reveal was part of the original plan, and there was no problem for the party when it happened.

Sure, maybe the Evil alignment can be kept over several adventures, but it only takes one slip, and then PvP is inevitable.

Why? There's no rule that everybody has to have the same outlook. As long as their goals are compatible (at least the short term ones), ...

Their goals aren't compatible. The Paladin's goals include vanquishing Evil.

And I didn't suggest that they had to have the same outlook, but they should be characters who are allowed to work together.

And the evil one will have a reason to keep his evil in check to stay hidden.

That I agree with. I once played a 2E Thief in a party with a Paladin. The DM once tried to say that, based on my actions, my alignment of Neutral Good should change to Lawful Good. I had to explain that he was not Lawful, but was currently finding traveling with a Paladin to be more lucrative that theft, and not picking any pockets was the price he paid to do so.

It looks like they're trying to avoid PvP but still have complex characters, that's certainly a workable thing.

Certainly. But complex characters who are compatible works much better than complex characters who are not.

This character's goal is to become a Lich. That is not compatible with the Paladin's goals. They aren't trying to avoid PvP. They are merely postponing it.

[Airk]

Yeaaaah. Campaign implosion waiting to happen. Do not attempt.

[druid91]

Frankly - putting a character who is THAT evil (becoming a Lich is capital 'B' Bad News) in a party with a paladin sounds like you're just asking for all sorts of in-party crap to hit the proverbial fan.

I recommend against making the attempt of this party combination.

To be fair, I played a game in which a LE Necromancer and LG Paladin were allies more often than not. They came into conflict a lot less often than you'd think.

You just have to kick fewer puppies and be more inventive with your evil. Think of it like being a TV show writer trying to slip things past the censor. It makes being evil harder, but also ultimately more rewarding when you do pull out your "AHA. I've unleashed an ancient undead horror to fight the ancient demonic horror!" "Oh, that's goo-, Wait... what?!" "Trust me, it's only got a 42% chance of backfiring horribly."

[MonkeySage]

This is 3.X; the character in question, the cleric, is a generally friendly and charming guy, who means it when he says he likes someone. He's likely to offer good advice even to an enemy he's trying to kill. He wants to become a lich as a stepping stone toward overthrowing a god of the dead, a cause he sincerely believes must be done for the greater good. That aside, there's definitely an element of pride in there; he honestly believes that he is the only one who can do it, the only one fit to take that god's place. He's very much an ends justifies the means kind of character.

He'll lie, cheat, and kill to achieve his goals, but he'll be polite about it, and he'll apologize if he has to kill someone he likes. And he's not likely to do any of those things without reason.

[CharonsHelper]

To be fair, I played a game in which a LE Necromancer and LG Paladin were allies more often than not. They came into conflict a lot less often than you'd think.

Well - besides the issues of the Paladin code making working with an evil character iffy (I know Pathfinder is less absolute on it) it depends upon the evil character and just what sort of evil they do. That's why I specifically noted "THAT evil". If a character is only borderline evil (like most lawyers :P) then it can certainly work. However, I think that in 3.5 they mention that becoming a lich means the sacrifice of bunches of sentient creatures. The kind of character who wants to do that is an entire other kind of evil.

[Ettina]

Regarding the idea of having those two in a party together - if both players approach it maturely, I see no issue. Sure, maybe it'll end in PvP - that's not necessarily a bad thing, if players can handle that. Maybe one or the other will be converted to a different alignment/goal in the future - for example, paladin-to-blackguard is a doable character arc. Or maybe they'll have their characters avoid PvP, either by avoiding the 'discovery' or by building complex characters who don't base all their decisions on good vs evil. You could also easily build a paladin whose reaction to an evil ally would be 'try to redeem them' instead of 'turn on them' - for example, a paladin who follows Ilmater, since Ilmater's all about that forgiveness. There are so many options, so many ways that creative and mature players could make this work.

As for the OP's question, I'm not sure about Undetectable Alignment. It says it hides the character's alignment, but it says nothing about the aura that a cleric gives off. A cleric of an evil god pings evil regardless of their own alignment, because an alignment aura based on diety is a class feature for clerics. Does undetectable alignment affect the cleric aura, or just their character's alignment?

[Alex12]

However, I think that in 3.5 they mention that becoming a lich means the sacrifice of bunches of sentient creatures. The kind of character who wants to do that is an entire other kind of evil.

It doesn't actually say that in any source that I'm familiar with. Closest thing is that "The process of becoming a lich is unspeakably evil" which could mean a bunch of things.
Of course, there's an easy solution there:
"Of course I know how to undergo the lichdom ritual. It's dead easy (if you'll pardon the pun). Any idiot who can hack together a magic talisman, has even the most rudimentary grasp of necromancy, and is willing to sacrifice a hundred innocent souls to *insert evil death god here* can pull it off. I'm trying to work out a way to do it without empowering *insert evil death god here.*."

Also, definitely talk to the Paladin player OOC, as well as the DM, about this. There might be a way to justify things. Like, if the Paladin and the would-be lich are childhood friends, or the Paladin agrees that, provided a way can be found for the cleric to become a lich without performing unspeakable acts on anything except his own soul, the cleric really would be a better god than the one he's trying to replace.

[HeadAcheron]

Do you know the Paladin's player? Do you know how they would react as a player to your character? On one extreme, some people take these things like a personal offense, on another some people would laugh-off their character being backstabbed by a supposed friend or savour the story twist. Depending on the attitude of the people of at the table this could either lead to horrible drama between the players or a enjoyable experience while the characters are dealing with drama.

This. So much this.

[AMFV]

Regarding the idea of having those two in a party together - if both players approach it maturely, I see no issue. Sure, maybe it'll end in PvP - that's not necessarily a bad thing, if players can handle that. Maybe one or the other will be converted to a different alignment/goal in the future - for example, paladin-to-blackguard is a doable character arc. Or maybe they'll have their characters avoid PvP, either by avoiding the 'discovery' or by building complex characters who don't base all their decisions on good vs evil. You could also easily build a paladin whose reaction to an evil ally would be 'try to redeem them' instead of 'turn on them' - for example, a paladin who follows Ilmater, since Ilmater's all about that forgiveness. There are so many options, so many ways that creative and mature players could make this work.

As for the OP's question, I'm not sure about Undetectable Alignment. It says it hides the character's alignment, but it says nothing about the aura that a cleric gives off. A cleric of an evil god pings evil regardless of their own alignment, because an alignment aura based on diety is a class feature for clerics. Does undetectable alignment affect the cleric aura, or just their character's alignment?

Planar Motes would do it in 3.5. Although to be fair I would probably ask the DM about it, see if he can homebrew an item for that purpose. Since the only real use is to keep the party from murdering each other, the DM should probably be on-board. I think the mechanical issue is less important than addressing the potential social pitfalls prior.

[veti]

This. So much this.

Agreed. The concept could work perfectly well, I'd think it was pretty entertaining myself - but some players, including by the looks of things many posters in this thread, would lose it when they found out.

Obviously, you need something to block "detect evil". I suggest an object. A spell is too risky (sooner or later you'll be hit by a 'dispel magic', or something - and even if not, you'll be down at least one spell slot per day, which is a noticeable handicap at low level). Talk to the DM about sourcing a Doohicky of Nondetection, or some such.

[Âmesang]

Maybe one or the other will be converted to a different alignment/goal in the future - for example, paladin-to-blackguard is a doable character arc.

See, now I'm picturing the cleric is Emperor Palpatine and the paladin as Anakin Skywalker.

As for the OP's question, I'm not sure about Undetectable Alignment. It says it hides the character's alignment, but it says nothing about the aura that a cleric gives off. A cleric of an evil god pings evil regardless of their own alignment, because an alignment aura based on diety is a class feature for clerics. Does undetectable alignment affect the cleric aura, or just their character's alignment?

I don't see why it wouldn't. Everyone radiates an alignment aura, it's just that clerics/paladins/blackguards radiate stronger auras (equivalent to an outsider). The spell misdirection seems to indicate that it's the aura itself that's being detected. Heck, even paladins can learn undetectable alignment — would be kind of pointless if their auras of goodness still shined through, no?

[Malifice]

It's only crap hitting the fan when and if he becomes a Lich. Otherwise it's just a mildly unsavory nerdy guy doing research.

Dude, its 3.5.

The Evil cleric glows like a tree when the Paladin uses detect evil. More brightly than a third level mass murdering Rogue does.

Also, look to real life for what happens when two people who are fundamentally devoted to their religions, and fundamentally different in world views spend any amount of time together.

Youre putting together a devil worshipping dude who is OK with murder, with a puritanical inquisitor type.

It wont end well.

Personally, as the Paladin I would refuse to have anything to do with the Cleric unless they agreed to repent, renounce their deity, accept a good aligned deity, and turn back from the darkness.

Why? There's no rule that everybody has to have the same outlook. As long as their goals are compatible (at least the short term ones), they'll have a reason to be together.

Paladin (3e SRD):

While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

Its a rule. A paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters or those who consistently offend her moral code.

This cleric ticks both boxes.

[Alex12]

Dude, its 3.5.

The Evil cleric glows like a tree when the Paladin uses detect evil. More brightly than a third level mass murdering Rogue does.

Also, look to real life for what happens when two people who are fundamentally devoted to their religions, and fundamentally different in world views spend any amount of time together.

Youre putting together a devil worshipping dude who is OK with murder, with a puritanical inquisitor type.

It wont end well.

Personally, as the Paladin I would refuse to have anything to do with the Cleric unless they agreed to repent, renounce their deity, accept a good aligned deity, and turn back from the darkness.



Paladin (3e SRD):

While she may adventure with characters of any good or neutral alignment, a paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters, nor will she continue an association with someone who consistently offends her moral code. A paladin may accept only henchmen, followers, or cohorts who are lawful good.

Its a rule. A paladin will never knowingly associate with evil characters or those who consistently offend her moral code.

This cleric ticks both boxes.

There's a very important word in there. Knowingly. If the paladin doesn't know the cleric is evil (due to Undetectable Alignment or some other anti-divination mechanism) and the cleric is subtle (either hiding whatever atrocities/crimes against nature/whatever that he's doing, or being reasonably smart and not committing blatantly evil acts in the general vicinity of the paladin), then there's no real problem. We're not talking "Lord Puppykicker, the Slayer of Children" here, we're talking about someone who knows the basics of how paladins work (which I imagine is basically common knowledge) and is actively trying not to run afoul of it. After all, the paladin's moral code can't be offended by anything he doesn't know about.

[Malifice]

There's a very important word in there. Knowingly. If the paladin doesn't know the cleric is evil (due to Undetectable Alignment or some other anti-divination mechanism) and the cleric is subtle (either hiding whatever atrocities/crimes against nature/whatever that he's doing, or being reasonably smart and not committing blatantly evil acts in the general vicinity of the paladin), then there's no real problem.

And the instant the Paladin discovers he is evil, he kicks him out of the party. Its a problem waiting to happen.

Why on earth is an evil monster who desires becomeing a lich willingly travelling with a Paladin anyway?

We're not talking "Lord Puppykicker, the Slayer of Children"

Very very few evil people are like this.

[Mr.Moron]

Is this something you've actually cleared with the GM and other players at the table, or have you just decided this is a "Good Idea"™ on your own?

[MonkeySage]

It's a hypothetical scenario: basically I was looking for tips in the event that future gms allow me to use my cleric. this basic character concept is one I've wanted to play for a while. the cleric has other goals aside from his primary ones, including establishing a bank (a goal which is at least not obviously evil). To set this up, he'll need to travel quite a bit. as I've said, the cleric is very personable, makes friends easily and generally gets along with people who are polite. he's got a steady temper so he's not easy to anger (just watch out when he does get angry :P).

He doesn't even swear; thinks it's rude.

[Jay R]

It doesn't actually say that in any source that I'm familiar with. Closest thing is that "The process of becoming a lich is unspeakably evil" which could mean a bunch of things.

I suppose it could, but it probably means that it's unspeakably evil.

Of course, there's an easy solution there:
"Of course I know how to undergo the lichdom ritual. It's dead easy (if you'll pardon the pun). Any idiot who can hack together a magic talisman, has even the most rudimentary grasp of necromancy, and is willing to sacrifice a hundred innocent souls to *insert evil death god here* can pull it off. I'm trying to work out a way to do it without empowering *insert evil death god here.*."

OK, I'll bite. How does this solve the fact that a Paladin will never associate with evil characters, and the cleric is an evil character?

When the secret gets out the party is permanently broken. That's what needs to be fixed.

Also, definitely talk to the Paladin player OOC, as well as the DM, about this. There might be a way to justify things. Like, if the Paladin and the would-be lich are childhood friends, or the Paladin agrees that, provided a way can be found for the cleric to become a lich without performing unspeakable acts on anything except his own soul, the cleric really would be a better god than the one he's trying to replace.

But the cleric is still Evil, and the Paladin will still not associate with him.

And whatever you wind up doing is not a lich, if it isn't Evil.

[Red Fel]

The ultimate obstacle - really, the only obstacle, provided your character is not over-the-top puppy-kicking Evil - is the Paladin's Code. This explicitly prohibits him from associating with Evil characters for a duration. That's explicit. If it's the sort of rule the DM enforces, it's not worth bringing this character to the table. Talk it out with the Paladin's player, one of you will have to roll a new character.

That said, if the DM does not enforce that admittedly stupid aspect of the Paladin's code, the only conflict emerges - as AMFV points out - when and if the Cleric succeeds at his goal of Lichdom. At that point, yeah, the conflict becomes pretty much inevitable. But up until that point, it is possible for Good and Evil characters with common goals to be friends. Harder when one of them is a Paladin, but not impossible. Give them a common backstory. Heck, make the Cleric's transition into Evil almost tragic, something the Paladin tries to dissuade, while still holding on hope that his friend can be redeemed. (But not in an obnoxious way.)

That said, I'm going with the crowd. Assuming RAW interpretation and default Paladin's Code, bringing this character to the table is simply asking for a party implosion.

[Douche]

You're going to have to do some evil stuff at some point, and whether or not the paladin character is there for it, the paladin player will hear it. If he wants his character to find out, he will find out.

At that point, why even bother concealing it? And why gimp yourself by pretending to be a fighter?

[rooster707]

A thin sheet of lead?

[Mr.Moron]

It's a hypothetical scenario: basically I was looking for tips in the event that future gms allow me to use my cleric. this basic character concept is one I've wanted to play for a while. the cleric has other goals aside from his primary ones, including establishing a bank (a goal which is at least not obviously evil). To set this up, he'll need to travel quite a bit. as I've said, the cleric is very personable, makes friends easily and generally gets along with people who are polite. he's got a steady temper so he's not easy to anger (just watch out when he does get angry :P).

He doesn't even swear; thinks it's rude.

There are no general tips. It's a group by group basis. If the group was the type that allowed paladins it is by defintion not the kind that allows evil characters. If I was the kind of player inclined to play with evil characters in my party or the kind of GM inclined to allow them under any circumstance (I'm not, but this is hypothetical), I'd expect the character to only be accepted with unanimous approval from the existing party.

The player would have to go in with understanding that the first time his evil acts makes someone uncomfortable, or causes conflict with the party his chances of suffering a sudden heart attack will start to approach 1.


Evil alignments are called out in every addition as not being player options by default. The game is plastered all over with the word "Hero" in descriptions of PC at every opportunity. And evil-only options & supplements explicitly call out their "Only under special approval and even then be careful" nature.

Basically don't be disruptive, don't make anyone uncomfortable and expect the universe to be keeping you on a leash so short it's basically just a handle.