|
Before I start, yes I know PVP is definitely not allowed in PFS organized play. That said, I've run into a few situations where I kinda need it clarified.
I'm playing a lawful PC and my party just keeps breaking laws. I ask the party to be law abiding, but they won't stop or the particular adventure cannot be undertaken without massive disregard to laws (especially if the party really lacks social skills).
So, first, what part of the PFS Cooperate concept relates to respecting the alignment (or deity's alignment) of other PFS party members?
I often find that other PCs can't be reasoned with regarding the overall alignment of the party. Some players compulsively kill helpless enemies, for example (like unconscious enemies).
Now, I know PVP isn't legal, What are my options?
Can I use social skills to convince/force other PCs to refrain from certain actions (diplomacy or intimidate)?
Can I use non-harmful spells to limit an allied player's ability to wreak havoc on my moral code (like charm on the player or sanctuary on a helpless NPC)?
Can I use spells or items to deliberately impede allies so they are unable to join or are late to a battle (like wall of stone/create pit/caltrops placed in their projected path)?
Can I physically restrain, handcuff, or disarm allied players that continue to behave contrary to a cooperative party?
Can I inform the NPC law enforcement of my party member's illegal transgressions?
If none of the above, how reasonable is it to withdraw from an adventure where the players are actively preventing your character from remaining true to their alignment or moral code? Does this answer change if your withdrawal would put the party below the minimum number of players required for an adventure?
|
Ok, that cooporation thing is not limited to the party members cooporating with you. It goes at least both ways.
So, first, what part of the PFS Cooperate concept relates to respecting the alignment (or deity's alignment) of other PFS party members?
None.
I often find that other PCs can't be reasoned with regarding the overall alignment of the party.
Well, yes. They are playing their characters.
Some players compulsively kill helpless enemies, for example (like unconscious enemies).
Sometimes an evil act. Sometimes not.
My general rule is if you lick it it's yours. If you knock them down he's yours to do with as you wish.
My more diplomatic characters carry a wayfinder, a field commission contract, and a copper piece to hand to surrendering NPCs. Hi welcome to the society he can't kill you now.
Now, I know PVP isn't legal, What are my options?
Not a heck of a lot really.
Can I use social skills to convince/force other PCs to refrain from certain actions (diplomacy or intimidate)?
No. Those explicitly do not work on PCs.
Can I use non-harmful spells to limit an allied player's ability to wreak havoc on my moral code (like charm on the player or sanctuary on a helpless NPC)?
No. Lethal or not your are engaging in combat with your fellow players through your characters... unless the other player is ok with it.
Can I use spells or items to deliberately impede allies so they are unable to join or are late to a battle (like wall of stone/create pit/caltrops placed in their projected path)?
You're probably ok with a wall of stone around the NPC not so much with it around the PC.
Can I physically restrain, handcuff, or disarm allied players that continue to behave contrary to a cooperative party?
Absolutely not.
Can I inform the NPC law enforcement of my party member's illegal transgressions?
It would have to be both pretty egregious and not interfere with the mission. If your mission is to stea.. erm.. acquire the golden idol of the big eared tiki pharaoh bringing in the cops while the rogue is doing a mission impossible from the ceiling to snag it is going to get YOU drummed out of the society. If your party is burning down an orphanage... yeah you can probably call the cops.
If none of the above, how reasonable is it to withdraw from an adventure where the players are actively preventing your character from remaining true to their alignment or moral code? Does this answer change if your withdrawal would put the party below the minimum number of players required for an adventure?
They can continue with a pregen.
But yes, as mentioned above, its probably time to have a chat with the players...
|
|
Talk to the other players and remember that cooperation is a two way transaction. You need to accommodate their character's alignment as much as they need to accommodate yours.
That's my take on it too, definitely seems like a two way thing, but something that should be considered part of Cooperation. I know, the OP doesn't seem like I'm expecting it two-way, but I am.
You can not enforce the behavior of other players by any means. However the onus to cooperate is much on them as on you, and it's the Judge's job to remind them of that.
Talk to the other players and remember that cooperation is a two way transaction. You need to accommodate their character's alignment as much as they need to accommodate yours.That's my take on it too, definitely seems like a two way thing, but something that should be considered part of Cooperation. I know, the OP doesn't seem like I'm expecting it two-way, but I am.
What everyone has to remember as characters sworn to the Society, you've all pledged to put the mission first before all other concerns, ambitions,or vices.
|
|
My more diplomatic characters carry a wayfinder, a field commission contract, and a copper piece to hand to surrendering NPCs. Hi welcome to the society he can't kill you now.Never even heard of a "Field Commission Contract." Is this a real PFS item? Sounds awesome.
Kind of.
Pathfinders either go through 3 years of training or (allegedly more rarely) get promoted in the field. Most characters seem to go with the latter so they can't be that uncommon. Here's your money, you are now my minion, everyone else, hands off my minion(s)/new recruits/ prisoners
Might work.
Might.
|
|
My more diplomatic characters carry a wayfinder, a field commission contract, and a copper piece to hand to surrendering NPCs. Hi welcome to the society he can't kill you now.Never even heard of a "Field Commission Contract." Is this a real PFS item? Sounds awesome.Kind of.
Pathfinders either go through 3 years of training or (allegedly more rarely) get promoted in the field. Most characters seem to go with the latter so they can't be that uncommon. Here's your money, you are now my minion, everyone else, hands off my minion(s)/new recruits/ prisoners
Might work.
Might.
So it's more a role-play thing, than actual rules. Got it, will try. Even if only "might" it still sounds like a pretty good option.
Venture-Lieutenant, Minnesota—Minneapolis
|
Before I start, yes I know PVP is definitely not allowed in PFS organized play. That said, I've run into a few situations where I kinda need it clarified.
I'm playing a lawful PC and my party just keeps breaking laws. I ask the party to be law abiding, but they won't stop or the particular adventure cannot be undertaken without massive disregard to laws (especially if the party really lacks social skills).
I believe you need to rethink some of the above.
You can be lawful, giving your word and keeping it. Respecting legitimate law.
Do not try and force your beliefs on the other characters. It just leads to problems.
This does work both ways though, they also can't force your character to do something that is against their beliefs. If they want to blackmail an NPC into doing something, you can simply state that your character can not be a part of that. If they go ahead, it is without you. If they want your character's help, they will need to choose a different path.
If they go ahead without your character, do not do anything that would undermine their efforts. Just sit back and allow them to carry out that part of the mission without you.
Also remember that they are your team mates. The mission is only successful if everyone gets through it and you accomplish your goals.
|
|
Can I use spells or items to deliberately impede allies so they are unable to join or are late to a battle (like wall of stone/create pit/caltrops placed in their projected path)?You're probably ok with a wall of stone around the NPC not so much with it around the PC.
Was thinking more along the lines of creating a linear wall of stone which blocks LOS and requires the PC to waste a turn (or turns) going around (or over).
Or placing a pit/caltrops in front of a PC that will likely prevent them from charging as their first action (maybe with acrobatics...).
I do agree with robertness, does seem rather uncooperative on my part.
The assumption here is that the Players are already intent on being uncooperative in this respect, and I've already failed in attempts to gain cooperation both in and out of character. Though I agree, this is more akin to fighting fire with fire.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also remember that lawful can be just as if not more murderhoboey than chaotic.
"you have disrupted the social order and now YOU WILL DIE FOR YOUR SINS
"In cheliax the penalty for highway robbery is death, followed by 20 years in prison
"My masters said you will die, so you must
"Gotta kill you. Its in my contract. Sorry.
|
|
Although I generally rule that the "No Player-versus-Player Combat" section prohibits any non-harmless spell or any action that requires a Save, Attack or Damage roll, the actual text is:
In short, you can never voluntarily use your character to kill another character—without their consent.
Anything that doesn't kill another player character, could be argued to be legal.
|
|
This does work both ways though, they also can't force your character to do something that is against their beliefs. If they want to blackmail an NPC into doing something, you can simply state that your character can not be a part of that. If they go ahead, it is without you. If they want your character's help, they will need to choose a different path.
If they go ahead without your character, do not do anything that would undermine their efforts. Just sit back and allow them to carry out that part of the mission without you.
Also remember that they are your team mates. The mission is only successful if everyone gets through it and you accomplish your goals.
If the party wants to blackmail an NPC and I choose to sit back and let it happen, I'm at least an Accomplice. As you say, they are MY teammates. I may not control or own them, but merely by sitting back and letting them perform such actions is definitely not ok behavior for a lawful PC.
Granted, the party could certain roleplay a diversion for my lawful PC so my attention was away from their blackmail attempts, and that could certainly work. But that would be Cooperation. If they are brazen in their unlawful behavior, it seems my only real option would be to withdraw my PC from the party.
|
|
If the party wants to blackmail an NPC and I choose to sit back and let it happen, I'm at least an Accomplice.
In a normal campaign, yes.
In pfs with its bag of mixed nuts in the party, morally ambiguous organization, and bag of mixed nuts behind the screen you have to cut the rest of the party a little slack, and the DM has to cut you a little slack for going on the adventure
|
|
Also remember that lawful can be just as if not more murderhoboey than chaotic.
"you have disrupted the social order and now YOU WILL DIE FOR YOUR SINS
"In cheliax the penalty for highway robbery is death, followed by 20 years in prison
"My masters said you will die, so you must
"Gotta kill you. Its in my contract. Sorry.
Yeah, totally get this. Lawful certainly has options in play-style, but I don't think being a rules-follower should be inherently problematic in PFS. Obviously, I could take it too far, but that's not what I'm looking for.
Although I generally rule that the "No Player-versus-Player Combat" section prohibits any non-harmless spell or any action that requires a Save, Attack or Damage roll, the actual text is:
In short, you can never voluntarily use your character to kill another character—without their consent.Anything that doesn't kill another player character, could be argued to be legal.
Although I agree the PVP is vague, I really don't want to debate that one again. Not really the point of this thread, as I'm not really looking for excuses to engage in PVP, just trying to figure out my options regarding inconvenient allied PCs for my alignment, deity, or moral code.
And the same applies to the reverse, with chaotic PCs that dislike having my rules-abiding PC in their party.
Venture-Captain, Minnesota
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anything that doesn't kill another player character, could be argued to be legal.
Not at my table.
(My goodness I never thought I'd say that!)
PVP is PVP. Just don't go there. Murdock, I'm glad that you're not wanting to open that can of worms.
_____
What can you do? Talk to the other players, not just in the heat of the moment, but before the game starts. Discuss the disconnect between your players. There are many ways to play lawful.
My paladin gets along well with her teams, though she once made one rogue promise to replace something that he took, after she found out that he stole something. She did this not by threatening, but by looking at him in a very disappointed manner. "You... stole that? Oh, no! You are going to be returning it, aren't you?"
ROGUE GUY: "Huh. There were some other things in that room I wanted to look at... YES! Yes, I will gladly return this item, for I feel this crime weighs heavy upon my heart!"
(Sense Motive is not a great skill for Lyric.)
Meanwhile, the players and the GM were laughing their butts off. Despite a minor character disagreement, we were having a great time.
People who play with me know that murdering captives is not something that Lyric will tolerate. So, do what she does. Talk to the other characters first. Be the PC with the social skills who can get law enforcement to back the party. Be the person that offers viable alternatives to keep the prisoners restrained and truly out of the way.
Hmm
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I feel that the problem being described by the OP is a serious one. I no longer play at a venue in my metropolitan area because of the cavalier hostile, evil and murder-hobo-y attitudes of some of the players there. Yes, I am lucky that I have such a choice.
I would do the same as far as GMing for such players. I just have no desire to spend my time dealing with such people. *shrugs*
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
With a couple of my more good-focused characters I've taken to reporting other agents to the Society or law enforcement when they go full murderhobo. I don't expect anything to come from it but at least I feel like my character has at least tried to get some justice for the murder victims.
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the party wants to blackmail an NPC and I choose to sit back and let it happen, I'm at least an Accomplice.In a normal campaign, yes.
In pfs with its bag of mixed nuts in the party, morally ambiguous organization, and bag of mixed nuts behind the screen you have to cut the rest of the party a little slack, and the DM has to cut you a little slack for going on the adventure
I'm crying tears of joy from that single scene, now I have to watch that entire movie...
Owner - D20 Hobbies
|
1) So, first, what part of the PFS Cooperate concept relates to respecting the alignment (or deity's alignment) of other PFS party members?
2) Can I use social skills to convince/force other PCs to refrain from certain actions (diplomacy or intimidate)?
3) Can I use non-harmful spells to limit an allied player's ability to wreak havoc on my moral code (like charm on the player or sanctuary on a helpless NPC)?
4) Can I use spells or items to deliberately impede allies so they are unable to join or are late to a battle (like wall of stone/create pit/caltrops placed in their projected path)?
5) Can I physically restrain, handcuff, or disarm allied players that continue to behave contrary to a cooperative party?
6) Can I inform the NPC law enforcement of my party member's illegal transgressions?
7) If none of the above, how reasonable is it to withdraw from an adventure where the players are actively preventing your character from remaining true to their alignment or moral code? Does this answer change if your withdrawal would put the party below the minimum number of players required for an adventure?
1) Ever thing about their view of your actions? I can see they could say the same thing. In other words, the "breaking the law" stance is the norm. You can't break the law in real life in general. So the opportunity to play a game where you get to break laws is very rewarding. It'd be best if you can accept that, if you'd like to enjoy your game. I play nothing but LG types and I've never had much trouble enjoying games.
2) No and the GM should tell you to stop trying.
3) No, and the GM should ask you for a different actions or put you on delay.
4) No, see 2-3.
5) In general no.
6) Really?
7) You need to do what you think makes your enjoyment more. If that means withdrawl making it an illegal table, as a GM I'd finish the table and give you a 0 xp, 0 pp, X gp sheet.
----
I think you'd find the game more enjoyable if you loosened up your restrictions. I also accept that I may not understand the extremities of the violations. So I'll give you an example:
A paladin had a missing to bring someone back to pathfinders. The person said they didn't want to come back. The typical thing that happens before you make a Diplomacy roll to bring him back. The party said "Diplomacy him" and a roll was made. It failed. So the paladin said "well I guess I can kill him and bring back his body". The party didn't disagree. The paladin said "Ok I do that". I stripped him of his Paladin-ness, and told him he needed an atonement. If the party would have said "we stop him" I wouldn't have let the NPC die. I'd still have stripped the Paladin of his code and required an atonement.
So are your violations like this Paladin? In which case you should ask your GM to step up and fix the issue. Or is it of the kind that is common/expected/normal for PFS scenarios, in which case you should chill?
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
If BOTH parties agree to PVP then I don't usually consider it PvP, i.e. if Joe, RPing his character's alignment, tries to stop Fred's character, also RPing his alignment, from committing an act using force, and both Joe and Fred are in agreement that their characters would do this, and are fine with this and its results. Anything else is one player trying to force his will upon another player's character and that is primarily what the no PvP rules are meant to stop. So all you have to do is ask yourself, "Am I forcing my will upon another player's character?"
|
|
As far as non-harmful spells, I would allow you to use Calm Emotions on other PCs out of combat (they get a Will save, of course) or certain bardic performances like Fascinate. Of course, I would first try to get the players to resolve the issue OOC, but if a player insisted, I would allow it.
I would also allow the affected PC to respond as they saw fit.
I'd make sure everyone involved understood their options and the consequences of each choice. Then I'd let them do what they wanted, and apply the consequences that we just reviewed. That is, unless the players involved were actually only 12 years old.
|
|
The best advice I can give is you be you, but let everyone else be who they are as well.
Live up to your own code by having your PC follow the law, but let go of the idea that being lawful means forcing everyone else to follow the laws.
Just because the rest of the group wants to break into a house doesn't mean you have to help. But it also doesn't mean you have to stop them.
But understand this. The Pathfinder Society is a neutral organization. While they are not evil like the Aspis Consortium, they are not above breaking the law when it is the most expedient course of action.
I recall at least one scenario where the PCs are sent to a place where it is illegal to be a Pathfinder.
If you think that following the law is more important than completing the mission, you've joined the wrong organization.
|
|
Again, law is the example. I'm asking regarding players who feel compelled to force their alignment on party in an excessive capacity.
If I'm alignment X, I don't need to constantly impose my morality on others, but some players are excessive and don't seem to accept the Cooperation aspect of PFS play. Cooperation is not forcing my moral code on others, but it does require keeping the morality of the entire party in mind when taking actions as a member of the party.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
Again, law is the example. I'm asking regarding players who feel compelled to force their alignment on party in an excessive capacity.
If I'm alignment X, I don't need to constantly impose my morality on others, but some players are excessive and don't seem to accept the Cooperation aspect of PFS play. Cooperation is not forcing my moral code on others, but it does require keeping the morality of the entire party in mind when taking actions as a member of the party.
This is no different from any other situation where players are playing in a style that prevents others at the table from having fun. The best solution is always to sit down with the players in question and have a discussion, possibly bringing either the GM or a VO in on it if you feel tensions would be sufficient to require an arbiter. This is a social issue, not a gaming issue. Trying to solve it in game isn't going to solve anything because that is not actually where the problem lies.
|
|
Again, law is the example. I'm asking regarding players who feel compelled to force their alignment on party in an excessive capacity.
If I'm alignment X, I don't need to constantly impose my morality on others, but some players are excessive and don't seem to accept the Cooperation aspect of PFS play. Cooperation is not forcing my moral code on others, but it does require keeping the morality of the entire party in mind when taking actions as a member of the party.
Now this is slightly confusing. Originally you said that this was something that happened to a PC of yours, but now you seem to be saying that this is all some hypothetical. Please correct me if I'm taking this wrong
But now onto what you've just said.
Particularly:
I'm asking regarding players who feel compelled to force their alignment on party in an excessive capacity.
I think we're all in agreement that, especially in PFS, you shouldn't force your alignment on the rest of the party. However, you follow this up with
If I'm alignment X, I don't need to constantly impose my morality on others, but some players are excessive and don't seem to accept the Cooperation aspect of PFS play.
But this seems to be exactly what your example character is doing. I understand the problem if your party members are killing enemies that have surrendered, but in one of your other posts you use the party blackmailing someone as something that you can't let happen due to it not being lawful.
By not letting them do this when it's directly aiding the completion of the mission you are in fact forcing your alignment on them.
You mention that you cannot let it happen as it would make you an accomplice. Why can you not simply tell them that you cannot take part in a such an illegal act,briefly try to convince them to accomplish their goal another way, and if that fails simply wash your hands of the matter by saying "I will not take any part in this act, but since it is for the good of the mission, should you need my help with anything else I would be glad to assist."
This seems to be the easiest way to solve your problem to me. By doing it this way you are not part of whatever unlawful deed they are committing, but you can still aid them in accomplishing any other part of the mission.
If your character is so inflexible that he cannot even do this, then I would say he does not seem fit to be a Pathfinder Agent. Perhaps a book keeper or Lodge Guard, but not an active Field Agent.
|
Ultimately, the actions of other players are suppose to be moderated by the GM not the other player characters largely.
That said, I have noticed a lot of issues like the op mentioned when it comes to the Chaotic Neutral alignment playing with more good aligned characters.
Season 7-04 "The Ironbound Schism" spoilers ahead!
I think one of the major challenges I've not been able to find a good answer to is what to do about a character's actions that don't necessarily violate an alignment but run counter to their Faction or the Society's general mission as mentioned in the example above. A chaotic neutral character trying to kill an enslaved creature isn't a violation of their alignment really, especially if those creatures are threatening them first. But a member of Liberty's Edge killing a slave without trying to free them first is a clearly in opposition to the mission of their faction.
There just isn't a system in place to deal with something like that. I feel there should perhaps be something like a faction infraction like alignment infractions for folks who do things like that.
|
Venture-Lieutenant, Florida—Melbourne
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Ultimately, the actions of other players are suppose to be moderated by the GM not the other player characters largely.
While I do think GMs can and should be involved in issues involving table conflicts, and if they want to take it upon themselves, that's great. But I think laying the responsibility on their shoulders for what should be a group effort is asking too much of someone who is strictly there on a voluntary basis. Everyone at the table is there to have fun, and everyone at the table is there by choice. That includes the GM. And they didn't choose to GM so that they could be a bady-sitter. The players need to take some responsibility for table cooperation.
|
|
Now this is slightly confusing. Originally you said that this was something that happened to a PC of yours, but now you seem to be saying that this is all some hypothetical. Please correct me if I'm taking this wrongAgain, law is the example. I'm asking regarding players who feel compelled to force their alignment on party in an excessive capacity.
If I'm alignment X, I don't need to constantly impose my morality on others, but some players are excessive and don't seem to accept the Cooperation aspect of PFS play. Cooperation is not forcing my moral code on others, but it does require keeping the morality of the entire party in mind when taking actions as a member of the party.
The lawful character was an example, but it did happen. The topic is directed at the more general issue. You were not wrong based on the prior posts, as I realized late that the example was misleading to my intentions. I posted to redirect the thread to the topic, not the example.
|
|
The lawful character was an example, but it did happen. The topic is directed at the more general issue. You were not wrong based on the prior posts, as I realized late that the example was misleading to my intentions. I posted to redirect the thread to the topic, not the example.
Ah, I understand now.
I am still curious as to your opinion on the rest of my post where I gave an analysis of what to do given a very Lawful character (like in your example) having to share a mission with those of a less lawful nature.