RPing around a party member whose motivation is to you kill and only you?


Advice

51 to 84 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>

Have tried to talk to the player multiple times. His Rogue is literally named Adolf at this point, to give you any indication of what is happening.

The group I play with is fine except for this one player, and has been a fun player in the past but has decided to go crazy on this one campaign.

I realize this is a player issue, not a character issue, but the most fun I could have and the least fun the other player could have is getting beaten into the ground by paladin without the paladin pulling any tricks, which is why I'm putting some high restrictions on things and playing out a scenario where the rogue is actually smart.

Lemartes, I do love your idea. The current "faction" is the band and the druid/myself, acting like two different but helpful groups in the same adventure. The druid trust me for obvious paladin reasons and the bard is in charge of the monk. So really, joining the band (they just fired their manager for sucking) would be the best bet to "take over" the group, since I really only need to win over one person to join the group.


Thanks. Interested in finding out how this goes. :)


Out of curiosity, why was a Human called to become the paladin of a Dwarven god (never mind that it's a third-party deity)? This seems like an odd choice...

Regardless... Be wary not to let the Rogue cost you your paladinhood. I didn't see a Code of Conduct listed on d20PFSRD, which means you have to follow the standard paladin's Code:
Which means that although you can associate with an evil character to defeat a greater evil, you must still act with honor; you cannot lie or cheat (pretending to be asleep to an lure your enemy into attacking you is not honorable). You must be able respect the decisions of the party leader (aka the legitimate authority), unless you are the party leader, or leave the party. Most importantly, you must "avoid working with evil characters or with anyone who consistently offends [your] moral code", and you must "punish those who harm or threaten innocents".

If you let Adolf the "Reformed" Bandit get away with acting like a murder hobo even once it will/should cost you all of your abilities.
As a Paladin, your character should make it clear that if the party desires to retain your valuable assistance (or worse, not become your enemies), every member of the group has to be able to abide by the conditions you set forth (aka, not acting like murder hobos). Because you must to smite them or turn them in to the legitimate authorities if they slip up.
(this is why nobody likes paladins, they literally have to be giant, controlling sticks in the mud).
You should also make it clear the moment he shows up that Adolf is evil and not to be trusted. Detect Evil will ping him on Round 1 as an evil presence. He doesn't need to have enough hit-dice to have an Aura yet because he'll likely be the only evil thing near by, and it doesn't take rocket science to figure out who the source of the presence is if you didn't detect an evil presence in the group before he showed up.

Plus there is this:

Quote:
A paladin can, as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for 3 rounds.

A move action will ping him as evil, even if he isn't powerfully evil enough to have an Aura yet.

If you don't want to end up killing your entire party (or even just Adolf), buy yourself a sap ASAP, and invest in Stage Combatant later so that you can do non-lethal damage without nerfing your hit rate. You can choose to forgive the other party members for protecting Adolf later... if you didn't kill them all. They won't become evil from one bad decision, but neither are they paladins, and it would be unreasonable to expect them to be perfect like you (the paladin thinks they) are.


Cantriped wrote:

Out of curiosity, why was a Human called to become the paladin of a Dwarven god (never mind that it's a third-party deity)? This seems like an odd choice...

Erm, Torag isn't a 3rd party deity. He's one of the main Golarion pantheon.

And there are a LOT of humans who follow him.

Pay attention to the "Church of Torag" and Clergy" sections.

Remember that Dwarves and Vikings are basically the same thing. It's only natural Ulfen would follow him.

Cantriped wrote:

If you let Adolf the "Reformed" Bandit get away with acting like a murder hobo even once it will/should cost you all of your abilities.

As a Paladin, your character should make it clear that if the party desires to retain your valuable assistance (or worse, not become your enemies), every member of the group has to be able to abide by the conditions you set forth (aka, not acting like murder hobos). Because you must to smite them or turn them in to the legitimate authorities if they slip up.
(this is why nobody likes paladins, they literally have to be giant, controlling sticks in the mud).

This is not how Paldins work.

Cantriped wrote:
You should also make it clear the moment he shows up that Adolf is evil and not to be trusted. Detect Evil will ping him on Round 1 as an evil presence. He doesn't need to have enough hit-dice to have an Aura yet because he'll likely be the only evil thing near by, and it doesn't take rocket science to figure out who the source of the presence is if you didn't detect an evil presence in the group before he showed up.

This is REALLY not how Detect Evil works. He simply won't pop up on the radar without ACTIVE evil intent.


First: The OP stated his paladin worships Austri, not Torag. Which according to d20PFSRD is a third party deity published by Frog God Games. See Austri.

Second: Players have been arguing about the Paladin's code of conduct since second edition ADnD, so I don't expect to come to a consensus with them now. However the code of conduct for paladins in pathfinder is quite clearly described, and I quote:

Quote:

Code of Conduct: A paladin must be of lawful good alignment and loses all class features except proficiencies if she ever willingly commits an evil act.

Additionally, a paladin's code requires that she respect legitimate authority, act with honor (not lying, not cheating, not using poison, and so forth), help those in need (provided they do not use the help for evil or chaotic ends), and punish those who harm or threaten innocents.

In addition the penalties for failing to follow the code are equally clearly described, and I quote:
Quote:
A paladin who ceases to be lawful good, who willfully commits an evil act, or who violates the code of conduct loses all paladin spells and class features (including the service of the paladin's mount, but not weapon, armor, and shield proficiencies).

Naturally, the rest of my commentary in that regard is my advice and opinion on how that Code should be followed so as to avoid loss of powers; which would put the player in a tactically unfavorable position against the obviously antagonistic rogue.

Third: I'm sorry but the commonly held belief on these forums regarding the Detect Alignment spells and the necessity that the creature have an Aura to be detected are not supported by the rules as written, nor can I find any supporting clarification for said beliefs on the FAQ.

The spell works as follows:
On the first round you detect the

Quote:
Presence or absence of evil.

and not the "presence or absence of evil auras". This is an important distinction because of the fact that if the "HD or level of the aura's source is at least twice your character level, you are stunned for 1 round and the spell ends." and not having an aura at low levels prevents clerics and paladins from being stunned by Bugbears and 3rd level evil orcish warriors.

On the second round you detect the
Quote:
Number of evil auras (creatures, objects, or spells) in the area and the power of the most potent evil aura present.

In addition you are stunned as described above if you witness exceptionally powerful auras... like in anime when a character shudders or is taken aback by the "killing intent" of their more powerful enemy.

On the third round you detect the
Quote:
power and location of each aura. If an aura is outside your line of sight, then you discern its direction but not its exact location.
Furthermore, the spell states that
Quote:
Creatures with actively evil intents count as evil creatures for the purpose of this spell.

This doesn't actually make them evil. A good creature can be forced to commit an evil act (by blackmail for example), and while attempting to do so they would register as evil to the spell detect evil. However a paladin would not be able to smite them because they are not actually evil.

Nothing in the spell's description (or in any FAQ which I've found) states that a thing must have an Evil Aura to detect it as being evil. If such a ruling exists somewhere in the PRD or FAQ then please point me to it. However the spell does indicate by it's wording that lacking an evil aura would prevent the caster of Detect Evil from pinpointing the exact location of said evil presence.

For example, if a cleric casts Detect Evil on a crowd of 1st level commoners, and one of them is chaotic evil while the rest are true neutral. The cleric will detect that there is an evil presence amongst the crowd, but they will be unable to discern who exactly is evil regardless of how long they spend looking. This is because the level 1 chaotic evil common is not powerful enough to generate an aura of evil to be located by.

However, this is less of a problem for a Paladin, because their Detect evil class feature allows them to

Quote:
as a move action, concentrate on a single item or individual within 60 feet and determine if it is evil, learning the strength of its aura as if having studied it for 3 rounds.

In the above example of the crowd, a paladin could examine each member of the crowd individually (which naturally may take some time), but eventually they will determine that one commoner in particular is indeed evil, but not powerfully evil enough to generate an aura of evil.


To be brief, the rogue player seems like he is being intentionally disruptive, and the stated character motivation is simply juvenile. I can't imagine any realistic character having such a silly motivation.

The GM should be kiboshing the whole concept before its off the ground, or risk seeing the hard work he is bound to be putting into the campaign go to waste when it goes off the rails with acrimonious PVP antics fuelled by a deliberately disruptive player.

I don't think expressing your valid concerns to the DM is a cop out at all. Trying to deal with this OOC problem by IC actions would be s bigger mistake, in my opinion.

Scarab Sages

SorrySleeping wrote:

-Rogue that missed the starting session, and will be a "reformed" bandit from the woods. He is Chaotic Evil and currently not with the party.

So, out of character the Rogue has stated his 'true' motivation is to kill a paladin, since the other things he has done as a Bandit/Rogue have been too easy. His motivation that he tells the party is that he was cut out of phat loot from his bandit brothers and wishes to gain back what he needs.

For starters, the LG paladin and CE rogue are inherently at odds, so there isn't really anything different about your party than any other.

Since you are the paladin, I'd focus on being a beacon of Goodness and Law, and try to indirectly convert the rogue through positive example. That is what paladins do, after all.

As mentioned, detect evil only works on level 5+ rogues. So regarding detect evil, you can't detect him.

I would suggest talking to the GM, as Chaotic Evil and Lawful Good PCs in the same party will ultimately create conflict. You don't need to mention the killing part, as that bit is very normal for chaotic evil and for rogues. If the GM is fine with both team killing/PVP and having the diametrically opposed alignments, I'd consider making a new character.

The other option is that you could talk to the GM about anti-paladins, as those would work great in a party with a CE rogue. Then you and that player should talk about his character slowly seducing your paladin to the "dark side" of things. It would make for fun roleplaying for both parties.

On a side note, the entire party doesn't seem like a very likely mix. I hope the GM is going to create some reason that your party is formed, so the PCs can justify working together.

Lantern Lodge

You could always just out-badass him.

"So, you want to kill a Paladin? Let me give you the chance."

In front of the rest of the party, let him kill you. Don't fight back. Spend combat rounds dropping weapons and taking off your armor. Let him know that you hope this is what he wants.

Congratulate him when he wounds you. Forgive him.

Then, you've won.


1 person marked this as a favorite.

Maybe I've read too much OOTS but maybe OOC you should convince him killing an antipaladin would be cool, or some warlord. PvP rarely works well, and in OOTS they keep the CE player under control by "unleashing" him against the enemies. Just pray regularly, justify that without your guidance he'd go berserk, and to punish him just hit him or take away something from him. He could roleplay someone greedy and hedonistic, which means some nice food could do the trick. Then he can kind've "fake" character progression.

If he says that's unfair, than that would be hilarious.


I don't think I've seen anyone post this yet, HERO'S DEFIANCE is gonna be a great spell for you to have memorized if you've got a Rogue trying to kill you. Hell, let him see your HP score and try to Sneak Attack you, & then just turn around and laugh at him.


Just play normally and enjoy the game. If he kills you - make the same character with the same name, who has all the in character knowledge that your character had.


Imbicatus wrote:
Refusing to grant mercy to an evil character that is a known murderer isn't an evil act, it's justice.

If heinous acts mandate an execution by torture, such as the rack, or drawing and quartering, a clean painless death IS a mercy. Plus if the person dies while converted, you've saved his soul from damnation.


I really do not get all the advice for casting this spell or that spell. There is no way both of these characters live long enough for the paladin to reach 4th level.

Per the detect evil spell, your own detect evil power won't work until the opponent has 5 hit dice (or takes a level of Cleric or Paladin of an evil deity).

And surviving a sneak attack with a Coup de Grace thrown in on any given night is not going to end well for you (I assume you can't sleep forever, nor trust one real teammate to prevent the attack each and every night).

If this knowledge of yours about the Rogue's intent is only out-of-character, then just smiting the guy without cause will likely lead to your own paladin falling from grace.

Take it up with the GM, and tell him/her that you would rather not end up a fallen or dead paladin. Those are the two basic outcomes when you are first level and a single critical will do you in.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
SorrySleeping wrote:
Have tried to talk to the player multiple times. His Rogue is literally named Adolf at this point, to give you any indication of what is happening.

Leave. Now. Don't look back.


Gisher wrote:
SorrySleeping wrote:
Have tried to talk to the player multiple times. His Rogue is literally named Adolf at this point, to give you any indication of what is happening.
Leave. Now. Don't look back.

This is probably the most practical advice in this thread. Problem Player is indeed a problem, the GM who's letting Problem Player's antics proceed is going to be a much bigger one.


I think we're missing a fine solution here: steer the rogue's sights toward a DIFFERENT paladin.

All's fair in love and interfaith conflict.


pezlerpolychromatic wrote:

I think we're missing a fine solution here: steer the rogue's sights toward a DIFFERENT paladin.

All's fair in love and interfaith conflict.

That's a great solution.

By the end of it, the Paladin will have probably traded in his Champion of Holy Light card for membership in the AntiPally club. He won't be retaining his place in the heavenly choir under any reasonable GM, that's for sure.

Then there won't be any reason at all whatsoever for inter-party conflict. None at all. Nope, Nope, Nope.


Snowblind, Snarkwyrm wrote:
pezlerpolychromatic wrote:

I think we're missing a fine solution here: steer the rogue's sights toward a DIFFERENT paladin.

All's fair in love and interfaith conflict.

That's a great solution.

By the end of it, the Paladin will have probably traded in his Champion of Holy Light card for membership in the AntiPally club. He won't be retaining his place in the heavenly choir under any reasonable GM, that's for sure.

Then there won't be any reason at all whatsoever for inter-party conflict. None at all. Nope, Nope, Nope.

See? The plan takes the party paladin out of reach because he's no longer a viable target. It's perfect!


Late update. The Rogue finally got into the game and things did not go well for him. If any of you know how Reign of Winter goes, he was in the Ranger's guide hut that the bandits took over. He was late to act because he was cooking dinner when everyone started fighting.

He crit failed pretty badly and ended up dead. He crit failed once, rolling a 100 and breaking his weapon, and removing himself from combat. He tried to attack again later, and ended up crit failing again, this time just knocking himself out for 4 minutes.

Our Monk failed once, causing his attack to hit the next closest party member. The rogue was the only other one next to him, and was semi-considered a party member because he was the only bandit left and we were trying to get information out of him. The rogue died.

He has rerolled into a LE Stalker, making the group very interesting now since we lost our Bard/Monk (the monk player changed jobs irl and is no longer available for this session). The Bard rerolled into a LN Monk and we have a CN Druid. The bard and old monk were teleported away by their manager because they tried to fire him.

Conclusion - Make a character called Adolf, get nothing but horrible dice rolls.


So the character changed, but did the player? LE slayer sounds like 'alright, it failed, will try the same stuff slightly differently'.


Wow. A Paladin, CN, and LE. That has to sting...

Talk with the party about playful banter, and try not to take it farther. If you nail that it sounds pretty fun.


2 people marked this as a favorite.

I talked to the player. He says he might do stupid things and be sorta evil, but will not attempt to party kill unless something comes up in the game, but current he is working for an unknown reason with us for his own benefit and rather likes us not dead.

The party is fun since I have the 'Chosen One' Paladin archetype, and I'm playing around that I hate Paladin's myself and sorta begrudgingly do paladin stuff, leaning more towards NG while staying LG. I have successfully been called "a very bad paladin/the worst paladin I've ever seen", which is what I am sorta going for, and explains why I'm so willing to work with these clearly crazy people. I just want to forge armor.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Derek Dalton wrote:
Without knowing more the Rogue's excuse to attempt to kill you is just that an excuse for what seems like a problem player to screw with the campaign by killing you. Chaotic Evil in a group of Nuetrals is still a problem. The alignment is not a party friendly alignment. The fact the GM is allowing it is something I'd like to know why. Nuetral and Lawful Evil can and will work with a group Chaotics don't play well with others.

Complete agreement. IMO, the GM is the jerk here for allowing this guy to not only be CE in an otherwise non-evil party, but to profess a desire to another party member (out of character, the player knows). The rogue shouldn't be allowed into the party and the GM should be the one that says so if the rest of the party doesn't have the kahunas to step up.


The Guy With A Face wrote:

You guys forgot. He's the paladin so clearly he'd be in the wrong for confronting the evil guy who wants kill him (since he's not a designated party enemy). As a paladin player he's just supposed to "suck it up buttercup" and deal with this in a way that allows the rogue to commit as many evil actions as desired and halfheartedly defend himself (if at all) when the rogue finally decides to kill him. At least, that's what I've learned on these forums. XD

Lol... where does it say this, anywhere? He's a murderhobo, er adventurer. Once he learns there is a threat to his life, he can deal with it/react to it.

If this rogue/player is actually stupid enough to make a character to explicitly kill another player, he deserves to die.

As GM, I would have no problem with the paladin killing the rogue, once he knew the rogue was coming for him.. even with metagaming.

Sort of shitty for the rogue player to come at someone like that to begin with.


Pathfinder Roleplaying Game Superscriber
Grollub wrote:
As GM, I would have no problem with the paladin killing the rogue, once he knew the rogue was coming for him.. even with metagaming.

Indeed, the other option for the GM.


It isn't so much that the GM allowed it, and more that the GM wasn't made aware. The GM never knew about the killing attempt until now, when the action was over.

As for the alignment thing, the GM is hand waving that. We have a really stupid party and I originally planed to be a TN Magus until party members got swapped around and everyone else changed what they were going to be, and was sorta stuck with Pally as we entered it due to some of the other class changes. The stalker is acting LN/TN at the moment at least.


I'm sad I just now read this.

I'm on mobile, so relevant links are inaccessible, but there is a long standing anime trope that fits the dynamic perfectly in the traveling companions who refuse to let each other die because they plan on one killing the other.

Good writing would have your characters establish a form of comradic rivalry wherein the characters cooperate for the greater purpose (reffered to as the PLOT) and only settling their differences when the story has ended.

Wanting to kill each other, and actually doing it are two different things. The rivalry dynamic could be a lot of fun to RP and is one of the best ways to include paladins in games with no alignment or behavioral restrictions on other characters.

Bonus: maintain some code about wanting your opponent to be worthy (metagame terms: high enough level to allow you both to play through the game) before this fight happens.

By the end of it your characters might not even want to kill each other.

That would have been my approach.


1 person marked this as a favorite.
master_marshmallow wrote:

I'm sad I just now read this.

I'm on mobile, so relevant links are inaccessible, but there is a long standing anime trope that fits the dynamic perfectly in the traveling companions who refuse to let each other die because they plan on one killing the other.

I believe this is what you're referring to.


It's a cool trope but there's a bit of a difference between Mugen and Jin, and this scenario which is basically "nameless a!&&#*+ vs main character".

Quite honestly this is the most "anime" way this could have ended. It starts with the random mook (complete with edgy backstory and sprsrsbsns personality to heighten the comedy) trying to kill the MC, and fate intervening in ever more hilarious ways to stop him, until eventually he's put down...and nobody knows he was their enemy in the first place.

Reminds me of the Oingo Boingo (or later one with Hol Horse) episode of JoJo.


Trope is correct, and I'm sure as far as the medium goes, the characters definitely start off as enemies, have a fight that ends with neither dying, then acknowledge and recognize each other's talents and abilities and their value to the team.

I'm thinking more Vegeta and Goku than Mugen and Jin, but honestly either would have worked.

Just saying there are ways around the stigma of "kill immediately" there's even a line in the paladin code that says so.


Perhaps, alternatively, you could convince the rogue that it'd be more fun to make you fall and to crush your spirit under heel. Then, don't give in, no matter how miserable the rogue makes your paladin's life. Eventually, he'll either be inspired by your example, or he will manage to peeve enough of the rest of the party to get him simultaneously mauled and pummeled to death while the bard sings him a dirge.


Evil Rogue trying to kill a Paladin?

Smite and forget.

It's not like a Rogue will be a memorable opponent, anyway...


Everyone wants to talk about how great it is to be a paladin, until it's time to do paladin sh*t!!!!


Paladin_Knight_marshmallow wrote:
Everyone wants to talk about how great it is to be a paladin, until it's time to do paladin sh*t!!!!

Oh, the audacity of these spoiled, entitled players! Only interested in having fun while playing a Paladin! Don't they know playing a Paladin is a duty, a responsibility and a chore?

What do they think this is? A game?!

51 to 84 of 84 << first < prev | 1 | 2 | next > last >>
Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / RPing around a party member whose motivation is to you kill and only you? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.