KamisLastStand's page

If you don't even know the name of the group you're infiltrating, are you really that invested in the storyline? I'm guessing you're talking about the Sczarni.

I'd be curious to know your character's alignment. As a follower of Milani, I'll assume he is good. That being said, doing unsavory things in the name of some personally held belief about the "greater good" is one of the things Inquisitors are known for. If I were the DM, I'd give you some latitude. In my campaign, Inquisitors vary greatly depending on which god they follow. We have an Inquisitor of Cayden Cailean who is nothing like the stereotypical, ruthless, dogmatic killer. He’s a true follower of the Drunken Hero and he embraces life (and the ladies) and enjoys a good drink. He fights evil and would love to stamp out slavery, but he also holds himself to certain standards of morality. In fact, in my campaign, Cailean’s church doesn’t even call them “Inquisitors” (it sounds too dark). Instead, they call them “Agents” or “Operatives” and they have a decent network of covert operations devoted to opposing slavery and other forms of oppression. So even though they have more flexibility than the rank and file clergy, they hold themselves to certain standards simply because of their own beliefs.

I've never actually seen the spelling for the name. He said is once in the beginning for my 'hook' then they were referred to as the mob, so please excuse me for not know the name.

And I am neutral good. And I do try and be flexible with him. Even talked to them DM about bringing into the order [which other characters objected to, hes to gunho about things like this.]

I do uphold the right beliefs even when I deal with slavery and the finding of the big fish. I'm even thought as a character who prefers to use his words before his axe. The tennets of milani are upheld almost to a T, unless of course I need someone to talk.

You know that expression "When all you have is a hammer, everything starts to look like a nail" ?

This whole issue in your party is a source of dramatic tension. This could be an incredible game in progress.

Try to step back out of the character's perspective for a moment and ask what the story needs, rather than what you want.

The dramatic tension between your investigation and another PC's actions is great for the story! Embrace it.

But just because your character sheet is a long list of killing powers does not mean that killing or even violence is the solution.

Interact with this conflict. Take action, but don't finalize it. Try to stop or work around the other PC, don't just draw steel and stab him.

But, as far as I can see, this isn't a "questionable call" on the GM's part -- this could be a great game happening right before your eyes. All you need is a little shift in perspective.

I have to agree with you wholeheartedly. This is what we tried to do, but he more or less perused his goal of outing us because he disagreed with it.

But all in all, you are 100% right on how it should be handled.

To lay out the basis of this problem I'm having with my Dm...

Were playing the rise of the runelords adventure path, and Ive started to play as a inquisitioner. Now my god Milani has set me a mission to go undercover to investigate the Mob. Ive you've played the path you know the name of the mob but i cant spell it or think of it at the moment. Now I'm considered an underboss and this investigation has been going on for some years now, back story plot blah blah blah.

Now the problem start to arise when another of the Pc's starts to get a bit...antsy about the whole things, me being a Holy man and in the mob with a slave trade going on, and begins to... well basically go after the mob and everyone in it, i.e me and a few of the fellow party members. At this point I go and talk to the DM.

1) hes using Meta in a obtrusive manner
2) putting my character in a... difficult position.

You see he not really trying to go after the mob but trying to expose me and the rest of the party. Now this ,in story of course, would put our heads on the line. So I tell the DM If he causes a problem in the game for me, I wont hesitate to kill him. I am an inquisitioner. I have the duty to protect my cover and to fulfill my objective of sniffing out the buyers of slaves.
To which he replied 'That's an alinement check. Its selfish of you to kill him.'

Now what you don't see and what I cant really show/type out for you is my DM is a good guy, and is just trying to make people happy. Which is admirable, but he is technically forcing us into certain roles to make one party member happy. I'm trying to play my character and react the way he would but I cant or loose my God and his identity.

What I'm asking is who is right?

For him to bogart us into either excepting a 'half cocked' cleric/paladin into whats supposed to be a delicate operation.
Or
Us who are just trying to play our game.

Although this does sound one sided and I'm presetting only what helps me but this is honestly how its going down.