Roleplaying Advice: Keeping the Peace

[DSCrankshaw]

Once again, our party has found itself in a sticky situation, and, as usual, I'm the cause of it. So I thought I'd ask for a bit of advice.

To start with, I'm playing a lawful good dwarf knight in a PbP campaign. It's pretty low level right now, so the party's 2nd/3rd level. My character's the official party leader, mainly because nobody else wants the position. The party consists of an elf wizard/cleric, an elf wizard/duskblade, an elf cleric, a dwarf cleric, and a human rogue. Although I'm not certain, I think the elves are mostly chaotic good (two of them are clerics of Corellon, so they're something close to that), the dwarf's lawful good, and the human's chaotic neutral.

So, the problem begins with the elf cleric, who's not completely sane (I believe we've psychoanalyzed her as being in a dissociative fugue state), and has a particular grudge against goblinoids of all stripes: the only good goblinoid is a dead one. So, of course, we have a run-in with a peaceful bugbear and his goblin cohorts. Now the bugbear's not a good guy (he's a cleric of Vecna, so at best he's true neutral), but he doesn't want to fight, and he offers to help us achieve our objective for a price. We couldn't reach an agreement, so he simply turns to leave, and the crazy elf shoots at him. Fighting ensues, the crazy elf's knocked out without doing too much damage, we kill a bunch of the cohorts, and ultimately the bugbear surrenders.

With the crazy elf unconscious and our other clerics lacking the spells to bring her to full consciousness, negotiations go much more smoothly. I promise neither I nor my companions will harm him as long as he cooperates, and no one (conscious) objects. So we ask him our questions, he answers politely, and the rogue begins stripping him of items. I point out, quite reasonably, I think, that we attacked him unprovoked, so maybe we shouldn't be robbing him as well, not being brigands and all that. As he has some juicy items, no one agrees. So I try to compromise: we know he's not a good guy, so we probably shouldn't trust him. So, even though it's not fair, reasonably we should confiscate those items that can be used offensively, and leave him only the items that're purely defensive: the ring of protection and the potion of cure light wounds. Since the ring's the one item everyone wants, no deal. Last try: I offer the duskblade/wizard, the one who's planning to claim the ring, the one magic item I've picked up, an energy assault augment crystal, if she lets the bugbear keep the ring. She takes the crystal, lets someone else claim the ring, then proposes we tie up the bugbear so the crazy elf can "deal with him" when she's restored to health in the morning. Meanwhile, the elf wizard/cleric sneaks the CLW potion to the unconscious crazy elf (rolled a 1 on the d8, so crazy elf is still out), apparently hoping to shorten the wait for "dealing with him."

So... what do I do? It seems like two of the players are trying to use a third PC to betray my deal. As they're chaotic, I can understand that they wouldn't view deals as strongly as my knight does, but they were awfully quick to take advantage of it and get the bugbear to answer their questions (he identified all the items we took from him, for example). But if they're good, shouldn't they have some qualms about killing a helpless prisoner, or at least about using their comrade to do it? And my knight's word obliges him to do what he can to stop it, not to mention that his in-game code does not allow him to attack defenseless prisoners. Allowing others to do it may not have in-game consequences, but it goes against the spirit of the code.

[Knight_Of_Twilight]

Murderizing helpless creatures, even bad ones, is definatly not good. Now, the Elf may be able to be excused, as it seems she is somewhat of a racist, so she acts uncharacteristically nasty towards them. However, the others seem kind of scheming..

To be honest, there isn't much you can do. Maybe the DM will take it easy on you, because, otherwise, you have to confront the whole party.

[Human Paragon 3]

I don't know exactly how you can ease your way out of this particular situation, but I do have some advice as to keeping the peace in general.

I played a campaign years back that was mixed alignment, even worse than yours. I was a L/G priest and the worst offender was a C/N or C/E thief/wizard. Gradually, through my roleplaying I converted the character to my religion and even shifted his alignment to C/G.

I did this in two ways. First, I showed disdain for his evil acts. Selfishness, hatred, wrath, greed etc. It seems like you've got this down. But honestly, I didn't do that for very long. Once I showed my initial disapproval I moved on to phase 2.

I praised him for his acts of good. I explained to other people (good priests, knights, paladins etc. who disapproved of our parties actions, particularly his) about all the good things he'd done. That he was one of the bravest men I knew, that he turned and faced the orc hordes when he didn't have to, etc. etc. etc. Eventually this praise rubbed off on him and became a self fulfilling prophecy. It seems that your situation is a little worse than mine is since you have a whole group of greedy characters (players?), but I think you can help things a little bit by using this tactic.

[Diggorian]

Had a similar sticky wicket when a PC wizard was doing dark deeds my ranger couldnt stomach. Solution: knocked him out.

But you wanna keep the peace ... I think Gaurd's tactic could work over time, and is worth a shot. Definately should get ya some roleplaying XP.

For the current situation, I say fall back to foundation of authority: the threat of violence.

Make sure the dwarf cleric has your back. He's LG like you, shouldnt be hard. Have the crazy elf revived while you stand blocking the way to the prisoner. Dont offer, explain, suggest, or advise; Tell the elf anything they do to your prisoner will be visited upon them. Elfy, likely low on HP, isnt likely to take it to ya -- but may rant about it.

For extra leverage, during the ensuing arguement, have your dwarf brother cut a deal with the rogue: a bigger loot share if he assists in protecting the bugbear.

Worse comes to worse, ya got four vs three odds.

[TwistedCable]

Sounds like poor roleplaying on their part. Maybe not for the crazy goblinoid hating one, if thats there character but I'd be getting the DM to put the other elf up for an alignment shift at the least - advocating torture/murder against a defenceless and, as far as you know, innocent creature for no apparent reason is NOT good, no matter how it's spun. In character, however, I think as a lawful good knight, you've got to stand for your beliefs, even if it does come to conflict.

[dragonwings]

If you can, take watch by yourself at night with with the LG dwarf, cut the ties on the bugbear, and get him out of there. The rest of your party seems Abyss-bent on stabbing and looting, your promise was to keep him safe and, in my opinion, you should uphold that promise. Perhaps the bugbear could help you from a distance. Maybe he could leave clues for you or send a messenger (preferably not a goblin) with instructions, notes, and other things. Before he goes, though, make sure he knows this request for assistance is a personal favor for you, not the rest of the party. Personally, I wouldn't help those that tried to stab me and killed my followers, but I'd be willing to do a little extra for the noble knight who let me run off at night and escape harm. Besides, there's nothing that says LG Knight can't be just the tiniest bit sneaky when it comes to making sure no innocents are harmed.

And I must say, excellent work by Gaurd Juris. I would have liked to see that in action over time.

[Citizen Joe]

You never should have talked with the bugbear. That way you wouldn't have had qualms with killing him. As it is, you effectively betrayed your friend and ally for a stranger that MIGHT not be evil.

[SoulCatcher78]

Sounds like the DM needs to take a bit of tighter rein on the alignment consequences for the other PCs. If they were evil, no problem (other than with you) cutting his throat. Being good, it seems that they're missing the point of having an alignment and therefore role playing in general. Since you offered your protection and the only option would be violence against the other party members (implied/threatened/take against), it only seems logical that you would set him free or to give him a fighting chance against the creepy elves. I vote for set him free and then lecture the Elves about the importance of being good rather than evil (since they're being no better than the goblinoids they apparently are ready to kill/torture). Might does not make right and all that.

[Dark Knight Renee]

It looks like there's no way to keep the peace without compromising your morals. The other guys look pretty intent on killing the bugbear. If you don't want that to happen, you're going to have to be clear that you don't want them to do that, and probably make a very clear threat that they'll have to go through you first if they want to attack the helpless and innocent (as in, he isn't doing anything to provoke them and doesn't seem likely to) prisoner. Continue to drum in that killing the prisoner is wrong, as well, maybe someone will eventually get it.

If they fail to respect this, and contenue to scheme to have this bugbear murdered... I don't see any good results coming from that, and you ca probably forget keeping the peace.


That still leaves the nutjob, but the nutjob can be dealt with differantly than sane PCs.

[Yogi]

Since you're the leader, just inform them of your decision to let the bugbear go, then let him go. There really is no need to negotiate. Plus, one of your PCs violated a deal that you made. Demand the crystal back, and if she refuses, declare that she ( and the person who had the ring now) have initiated player versus player conflict by stealing the ring, and attack them to get it back. Also, where is the DM among all of this? He should be warning them about evil alignments, which is obviously the case for your companions.

Unfortunately, I think that the other players have a case of the Chaotic Stupids. How long have you been playing together, and are there other people you can play with?

[Neon Knight]

Personally, I felt you handled the situation wrong. If one of my party members randomly attack someone, I'd knock the party member out and apologise. I think by fighting and killing the Bugbear's cohorts, you have sanctioned (to a degree) the crazy elf racist's actions. (Unless you tried to tell them (Bugbear and friends) to stop and they continued assaulting you anyway. Then I'd say it was self defense. If this was the case, ignore the above.)

My advice: Let the Bugbear go, and if they try to harm him, stop them by any means necessary. Don't sacrifice your character's morals for party peace. If you submit here, they are going to Chaotic Stupid their way through the campaign. Draw the line here and now, and don't let them cross it. Death before dishonor!

[Valdyr]

First of all, the bugbear is evil if he's a cleric of Vecna. Clerics can't be neutral unless their deity is neutral with respect to good and evil. So, by the RAW, he has to be LE, NE, or CE.

That's of little actual importance though. And in fact probably hurts your side since they can argue that killing a Evil cleric is a Good thing.

I'd start making friends. I think the Dwarven Cleric is a good bet, but you can also get the Rogue on your side as well. In order to be an effective party leader you need to have some agreement within the party, or at the very least a bunch of folk who recognize your authority (or authoriTAY). Building coalitions is hard, especially in a group of people (not characters) who tend towards chaos. Get at least a majority of them to agree that you are the leader and that for the most part you speak for the party. You can do this through convincing them with words, or possibly offering monetary rewards. Deals you make with NPCs have no meaning if you can't make the rest of your party abide by them.

[DSCrankshaw]

Well, right now I'm trying to defuse the situation out-of-character: give everyone a chance to explain their character's actions and make sure they all see where things are heading. I'd rather do it in character, but some out-of-character talking is better than in-character fighting.

The DM for this game is really good, and he likes throwing ethically challenging situations at us. Most of our encounters in this dungeon crawl have involved talking first, and we've been offered deals pretty often. Most of the time we have to say no, since the price is unacceptable, but this is a talk first, fight later game nevertheless. He's pretty lenient on alignments, but he has said that while no single action is likely to change alignment, patterns of behavior will have alignment consequences.

The situation got out of hand pretty quickly, so once the fight started it was hard to just stop. The bugbear had cast hold person on the crazy elf and the goblins were filling her full of crossbow bolts by the end of the first round.

I did overlook the exact alignment restriction of the cleric, but I'm not sure it'd change the situation. No one had identified him as a cleric of Vecna before the deal was made, and even so, I'm not sure my character could refuse a surrender no matter what his alignment.

The crazy elf has plenty of reason to hate goblinoids, as she was captured and badly mistreated in-game by a separate tribe, so we've allowed her some lee-way. However, I'm probably going to have to start pointing out that if she continues this way, she risks losing the favor of her god. Clerics are particularly vulnerable to alignment restrictions.

I'm not sure that anything aside from divine intervention will change her behavior, though. Her player has already said that the elf will challenge my character's leadership position once she discovers I let the bugbear go. It really doesn't make any difference whether my knight's the group leader or not, though: he still can't allow the party to kill unarmed prisoners.

[SoulCatcher78]

Makes you realize why most knights just have a squire and a horse. Other baggage just makes keeping your honor intact more difficult. If they are determined to run the game in that way, you'll either need to make adjustments to your character or seperate from the group. If he DM has planned this to bring some of these tendencies to a head, I hope he has a plan to pull this out of the fire before the game disolves into finger pointing and hard feelings.

[I_Got_This_Name]

Let the bugbear free in the night, and demand your crystal back from whoever stole it from you.

Yes, stole. If they're taking what you offer as part of a deal and betraying the deal, that's theft.

Also, if you're the only one on watch, you can return the bugbear's stuff, or alternative stuff of equal or greater value. This might be a bit chaotic, though.

Yes, he's an evil cleric. But, more importantly, he has surrendered to you, and deserves to be treated with all of the respect due a high-status prisoner. His minions are unimportant (if you're the only person of status in the party, the other PCs are unimportant too); goblins are replaceable, but he is important, and should be treated as such. If you can't keep him alive for ransom, then you have to let him go. Otherwise you'll get a reputation for killing your prisoners, and that shames you. More practically, if you later get captured, you'll likely be treated according to your reputation; same if your noncombatant family members find themselves captured. You want a reputation for humane conduct toward prisoners. If this means letting him go this time, then so be it.

Besides, you never caught him doing any evil. If you let him go, you can catch him doing something, and then fight him honorably.

[Citizen Joe]

Bugbears are reputed to be evil... It is the BUGBEAR's responsibility to prove that it is NOT evil and is in fact ACTIVELY trying to be a good being. Insane or not, the elf and anyone else can assume the bugbear is evil and thus justify their cause for attacking it.

The problem isn't so much that it was evil to do so but more about being a loose cannon. As soon as anyone attacks, that's pretty much it. Negotiations are over, it will end in somebody's death. Then its just a question of who side you join. Remaining neutral just pisses off everyone.

After the battle, and everyone is safe back at town, that is when you resolve the loose cannon problem. Pull that character aside and let them know that you don't approve and than they endangered the group. As such you can't allow them to stay with the team. Either get anger management sessions or they are out.

There seems to be some unspoken rule that you can be a total [pick your own expletive] and it will be ok because you're part of the party. But that just isn't how things work. In the field when lives are on the line, you stick to the party. Once you're safe, that's when you hold courts martial.

[PnP Fan]

hmmm. . . clerics of "good" deities not exactly behaving in a "good" fashion? Yeah, never heard that one before.
I'd start asking the cleric what his religion says about slaying helpless prisoners. That puts his behaviour in the hands of the DM. Your DM should back you up at least in terms of "good things don't kill helpless prisoners". And, if your clerics either fail their Knowledge:Religion check, or decide to wilfully go against their deity, then they should start losing clerical abilities.

Good luck, and try not to make it personal between you and the players.

[Brother_Franklin]

Sounds to me like an upity human getting a way of some elves genetic puporse: to keep the wilds clear of orks and other uglies.

[Diggorian]

Well, right now I'm trying to defuse the situation out-of-character: give everyone a chance to explain their character's actions and make sure they all see where things are heading. I'd rather do it in character, but some out-of-character talking is better than in-character fighting.

Both in and out of character the elf cleric really has no argument to justify their actions. If she's chaotic neutral, her killing an unarmed prisoner dips into chaotic evil. CG Corellon should'nt abide evil acts from his clerics, even upon evil creatures.

Your knight has both the moral high ground out of game and the support of your class' nature to back up your actions in game.

[Citizen Joe]

Both in and out of character the elf cleric really has no argument to justify their actions. If she's chaotic neutral, her killing an unarmed prisoner dips into chaotic evil. CG Corellon should'nt abide evil acts from his clerics, even upon evil creatures.

Every bit of that is questionable logic.
Elves don't like goblinoids and vice versa
Having a strong racist tendancy makes those actions perfectly justify the act, at least for the person with those tendancies
It's debatable as wo whether a cleric/bugbear can truly be unarmed
Killing unarmed prisoners is the standard law abiding profession of executioners
It's debatable whether the act is evil, let alone going against the nature of Corellon's faith

That being said, I don't support the elf's actions as it endangered the party.

[Diggorian]

The elf cleric's racism explains her actions, but doesnt justify them.

What justifies legal execution is evidence that the prisoner is an ongoing threat. The bugbear hasnt done anything from Crankshaw's recounting to warrant execution. Unwarranted killing is evil. Good deities dont condone evil actions from their followers.

Atleast thats the argument I would make from the knights point of view.

[Ulzgoroth]

Notably, your probably CG clerics can maintain their powers quite adequately as CN, which can forgive an awful lot of this sort of behavior. So the only question powers-wise is whether they're grossly violating their deity's rules.

Character-wise, though, the real question is 'would your character obviously defy a partymate's ethics this way? And would they really mistreat a prisoner like this?' And the answer might be yes...it is certainly possible for the characters as described so far to be acting entirely in their natures.

[Dan_Hemmens]

This isn't an IC problem, it's an OOC problem. You and the other players have different ideas about how the world works.

Sit down with the other players and your DM and say something like this (sorry if this puts words into your mouth):

"Look I want to make sure we're all on the same page here. As far as I'm concerned a D&D race is much like a real-world race. Every member is an individual, you can't make generalisations, and killing somebody because they're a member of a particular race is out-and-out evil. I'm not comfortable playing a Lawful Good character who associates with people who he believes are evil, so I'd like to check whether I'm misunderstanding something, or whether I should think about changing my character."

The GM will then hopefully respond in one of two ways. He'll either say:

"Actually, you're misinterpreting the way race works in this campaign world. Bugbears, like Sauron's Orcs, are twisted creatures with an irredeemably evil nature, and they *will* kill, despoil, and destroy given the chance. Now it's okay for your character to be uncomfortable with killing helpless victims, but a basic assumption of the world is that killing a member of an evil race is always justifiable."

or he'll say

"Actually, you're right. [Elf Dude's Player], you should be aware that you'll essentially be committing an evil act. Now if that's the path you want to take your character down, I'm cool with that, but it's going to cause friction in the group, and we're going to have to deal with that."

If you're unlucky he'll just say "hey, what's up man. He's just playing his character. That's why it's called a role-playing game. Duh."

[Dan_Hemmens]

The elf cleric's racism explains her actions, but doesnt justify them.

What justifies legal execution is evidence that the prisoner is an ongoing threat. The bugbear hasnt done anything from Crankshaw's recounting to warrant execution. Unwarranted killing is evil. Good deities dont condone evil actions from their followers.

Atleast thats the argument I would make from the knights point of view.

The problem is that it's not necessarily "racism." It's possible that, within the confines of game-reality, Bugbears are all evil creatures that delight in slaughter and bloodshed, and that letting this creature live *will* doom innocents to death.

[Diggorian]

I agree with your post before the last, Dan. That's the type of argument I'd make.

Crankshaw's DM doesnt seem to running bugbears that way though.

[Dan_Hemmens]

I agree with your post before the last, Dan. That's the type of argument I'd make.

Crankshaw's DM doesnt seem to running bugbears that way though.

It's difficult to tell. The OP does carry the implication that the Bugbear *is* "evil"

So I try to compromise: we know he's not a good guy, so we probably shouldn't trust him.

Plus the DM didn't seem to object to the elf going all psycho, so it's probably worth clearing something up.

[Setra]

Declare them evil.

Then smite!

Just kidding.

Seriously though, I agree with whomever brought up the idea of confronting the cleric(s?) about his(their?) religion, and its dealings with helpless captives.

[Nebnezz]

The way i see it you have two major hurtles, your own promise of non-violence, and keeping the bugbear with you. You can't really guarentee his future behavior will be as nice and non-evil as he is right now in your "care" and any promise he makes to not be a baddy will, predictably, be cancerous lies. He has co-opporated so far, so questioning him has been plenty lawful ("dont attack me and i wont kill you" sounds like a good deal to me!) But what to do with him now is another matter. He is obviously evil, For all you know Clerics of Vecna have "slaughter innocents" checked before "breakfast" on most daily planners. Letting him go will probably result in more gratuitous violence on school children, prisons wont take him, the guards would just kill him and look at you google-eyed for not doing it yourself. You most likely dont want to keep him around as he will most liely end up stabbing you in the back when the DM thinks its best to inconvenience you in the worst way. And appearantly killing someone who surrendered is against your moral code.

There is a way i see you can end the problem, keep your ethics justified, keep your promise, kill the fiend, make your friends happy, and win the hearts of million of blissfully ignorant school children everywhere.

Im hoping at least one of your many clerics is third level. If so, they should have standard, Phb 2nd lvl Spell Zone of Truth, that way you know he isnt full of Horrible, Cancerous, Deceit. And then things get a little more gray-area. The best way would be if one of your associate Wizards had 1st lvl Charm person (which works on humanoids, and seeing as goblinoid is a subclass humanoid, it should work.) Casting both of those should allow you to talk to him about just about anything he has done in the past, and make sure he's honest about it. If you dont have charm person, try regular old Diplomacy or, if you can make the ethical strech, Bluff. If under the ZOT spell, intimidate wouldnt make him tell you whatever you want to hear, but intimidating a helpless surrendered prisoner sounds mighty not-so-good-or-lawful. If these skills rest in someone else, try a good cop, bad cop routine. Let the liar or meany of the party be the bad cop and you be the good cop.

The goal here is two fold; make him confess to previous evils (talk about how you were fighting some large number of "Enemies" and were victorious over your foes, then ask your new friend, if under the spell, about his life long escapades) ---AND--- *special emphasis intented* Tell him that to remain co-opporative he must agree to never be evil or do anything evil again. You can make this as specific as you want to; never hurt little human children, never steal from the collection plate, etc. Then test it (again, thanks to the ZOT Spell) by offering a hypothetical situation, like an old, weak, helpless human carrying a bag of gold, ask the bugbear what he would do. If at any point durring the friendly chat he clams up, he is being un-coopporative and your promise of non-violence in exchange for co-opporation is fulfilled; Now you can hurt him without breaking your promise. If, like a total fool, he tells you the truth, that he would gut the old man and take his valuables, he has broken the promise to be non-evil from here on (evil intent and ability to carry out said evil would spark the preventative goodliness in your knight), and if he refused to make such a promise, same effect. Ultimately, your no longer bound to not hurt him as he is openly defying you. The part about his past was to justify an execution.

If in the unlikely event that under both spells he actually promises to be good and means it, as well as having no overt and willful evil in his past, you may have another Drizzt Do'Urden on your hands (albeit a severely underpowered and unintellegent one). At that point raising arms against your allys in his favor would be almost manditory in most knightly lawful codes of honor.

The only reason to do this instead of simply saying that he has to co-opporate or die, deciding that his participation in Vecna worship is evil enough to deserve death and not agreeing to be good counting as the deal breaker (this being the non-spell option) is so that your DM wont have any whacky loose ends to gut you with, testing the limits of your patience/sanity as well as your leadership/problem solving skills. This also serves as proof that you, the LG knight, did what you could do, within reason, to stop evil, uphold good and righteousness, punish evildoers, never break your promises, protect defenseless school children, and even attempt to convert (well...sorta) a Cleric of an evil deity. Its not your fault evil will be evil, and its not your job to endanger your group and the general public by not smiting evil where ever it may be found.

Sorry this is so long, i know i suck at being concise.

[Nebnezz]

Oops, almost forgot. The only other issue i see is your own teammate, the guy who shot the bugbear in the first place. This was his misstep, he shouldnt have done it, and when crap like this happens, some sort of leader-like arbitration needs to take place. Maybe he could forfit some treasure (not all, else he would just attack you now, or leave, or turn your friends against you or something) As this is an obviously emotional issue, i would handle it with care, as people are fully capable of being good people and having some kind of sever hang up that makes them act like that elf did. I agree with Diggorian, it explains but does not justify. As a lawful character, if for nothing else, you made the decision not to attack, and the elf did. Your the leader, elf should listen. If they want a new leader proceed from there, but a member of the party that flouts leadership is a hazard no matter who leads, and no matter the reasons they find to justify their actions. Sounds like something the whole group can agree to.

[Diggorian]

It's difficult to tell. The OP does carry the implication that the Bugbear *is* "evil"

True.

The knight could question the bugbear. If the bugbear admits he serves Vecna and would do evil things, the knight can conscientiously revoke his protection and allow the prisoner to be executed.

I see nothing in the knight's code that prevents this.