Peredur Anwyl's page

I have no inclination to play in a campaign where my options for dealing with a character who does things completely antithetical to multiple characters in the group, is either 1) we are forced to work together despite deep incompatibility or 2) we are dupes who have no idea what he does. And where you the GM say those are going to be the only options.

It's possibly only me, but basically having to game in what would be a constantly antagonistic and unamicable situation as the character situation, would drain any fun out of this game I might have had. That my only other option is to play my character as ignorant and helpless in the face of the stuff Thoon does.

I think that multiple good suggestions were offered for even just moderate changes he could have made to his concept that would have reconciled it to the at this point numerous characters who have asked for some kind of change to be made.

If my character were told that slaying the evil guy who goes around enslaving/thralling people and driving them insane would weaken him and others, he'd shrug and consider that an acceptable sacrifice to make. He might in fact even simply kill himself if he knew it would permanently cripple a figure like Thoon.

I'm not sure why in looking at all the characters you chose, you decided that in a predominantly good, and if not good, freedom loving group, would not end up with problems with someone like Thoon, doing what he does.

You can talk about evil and perspectives, but there are again degrees of evil, and ways to do evil characters without basically spiting the rest of the group's concepts, the concerns their players express, and basically catering to the idea that someone's personal art should be held above remotely accommodating the idea of sharing a game.

You can talk about "how pantheons work" but again, those are stories people read, not games people play together as a group where they ostensibly work together and tolerate each other. There's a difference between "characters don't always get along" and "character does things profoundly objectionable to multiple other characters"

I think at this point when your own response to the concerns of four players is "nope, Thoon gets to not change anything, and the situation will be contrived to make you accept it anyway, or otherwise know your characters are just ignorant of the terrible things he does", this isn't really a game I want to stick with, to be honest with you.

Thanks for your time and consideration, I wish you all the best of luck with this game and hope you enjoy yourselves.

edit: This isn't a request to join the other game, to be clear, you don't need to refer me to TSP or some such whatever. I'm generally withdrawing.

I'd prefer, were they to go with that suggestion (and it lines up with my own offered alternate take really), that they stuck to the willing over the willing and also the already insane. The latter adds an exploiting the helpless angle unless that would only be for people who are, y'know, Joker style crazy or some suchery.

I understand your concern that my background doesn't jive with yours. That's fine. Our characters do not know each other prior to the outset of the game necessarily. it is my responsibility to ensure I am a team player, that does not mean we have to see eye to eye in the beginning.

We ARE individuals. We are allowed to be more than one alignment bracket apart.

I took great offense because, in some way, I consider the story and character I put together to be a piece of art, however crude. Created within the guidelines and then accepted, only to be spat upon by someone who should be my peer, not someone with authority over me. I feel as if you are trying to impose your will upon me, which you have no right to do.

The group is predominantly good aligned or ascribe to ideals in direct contradiction of what your character believes, does and pursues. Three players have expressed qualms about this vocally.

That I am asking you to consider how your character can fit in a larger group and all you can talk about is how offended you are at having to compromise your personal art is again... we all have to share the same campaign space. If this is only about you and your personal art, why even join a group game?

No one has said "remake your character as good", one person even said "hey, maybe be chaotic neutral". I even said "hey, maybe still be evil, but maybe you only do your stuff to people who come to you willingly for it."

Maybe your madness is seen by yourself and others as some kind of transcendent cosmic wisdom, and thus various types of appropriate personality come to you willingly to be made crazy or thralls in order to become part of it. Would that really be that harsh a concept change? Something to let you go "you may think what I do is horrifyingly grotesque, but everyone I've done it to is a volunteer that comes to me." Maybe your character even holds it as a perverse point of pride that he/they/it has never done such a thing to anyone that didn't want it.

This isn't a "who can create the most glorious piece of art" competition. This is a shared campaign. If three players went to me "I can't see myself enjoying being in this game with your character/not being able to game with this character without massive problems", I would seriously consider making changes to my character and not say that we should all be forced to work together by the GM. If ontop of that I looked at the group makeup as a whole and noted that my character, not a great fit, I'd consider that besides.

I am again not looking to internet debate you on your character's justifications for why they do what they do, repeating how elder brains are evil and that this is what elder brains do is not actually responding to what the concerns are here. That's again just going this is my character, deal with it.

"Group cohesion": do you like everyone you work with? I know I don't. Even if you don't actively hate them, there are almost assuredly people in your life you dislike. can you not join with them for the greater good? does a little tension here and there not make a better story?

There is a difference between not liking someone that I work with, and working with someone who engages in things my character would actively have massive fundamental problems with. Similarly, there's "disliking people" and "working with people who are evil and faff about consuming psyches, driving people insane, and enslaving people".

You basically seem to just handwave this stuff off as something other characters might have deep problems with.

"dupes": Your word, not mine. You seem to be hung up on the concept that i am going to be trying to overtly or covertly harm the group. you are seeing an evil alignment on my character sheet (which i don't particularly see as your concern) and assuming one facet of evil in particular, looking at an entire character through a single, small lens.

No, I'm reading your backstory, noting that along with your evil alignment, and that you thereby as routine get up to evil, heinous stuff as related to it. I'm noting that stuff is not a great fit with several concepts here.

That you feel what your character does/believes is of no concern to any other player in the group as far as having to play alongside you, in a group, feels kind of solipsistic. We exist as a group of people, playing as a group, the overall fit of our characters is thereby a concern beyond you.

That you're veering into "don't look at my sheet" goes right further into that we're not so much a group as people who apparently shouldn't even be looking at each other's sheets. We're all in the same campaign dude.

"what do you feel..." - Do i feel that there being an evil person whose motives can align with something other than evil adds to the story? Yes. There is a reason the genre of fantasy literature has so many antiheroes and secondary characters with hidden/dark pasts. it makes for a good story. That is also part of the reason you don't see a long series of novels about cuddly CareBears. we don't necessarily have to like each other to cooperate.

Your character is an evil elder brain who goes around spreading insanity and enslaving people. What work of fantasy are you particularly talking about where something like that is a member of team protagonist?

That you are basically saying that being prevented or asked to tone your character's stuff down would be like turning the group into the carebears is an oddly extreme response.

"if you dropped..." - your post crosses even further into offending me. You, a fellow player, my peer in a shared roleplaying venture, presume to request that i remove an element of my character inherent in the race's description?

A.) creating thralls: this is what the race does. I am content for these things to happen off-screen, because 1.)they are inconsequential and 2.) it would be unwise to do so in good-aligned company and 3.) i dont create thralls, my minions do. i dont travel in a troupe of minions, and that is the way they biologically breed. it could even be argued that they arent even thralls, as for the most part they become full members of the race (which was the point i tried to make, albeit in a comical manner, in my earlier post).
B.) robbing people of sanity: if you had bothered to read my backstory in its entirety, i explained why Thoon must be careful not to sow too much madness. the insanity is an interesting aspect I would like to "play up" from time to time. It is not a new concept for my character concept, and you are just now voicing concern. To ask me to change an aspect around which i have made MANY character choices this late in the creation process is extremely unfair. To remove that aspect, I would have to get rid of 12 levels of one side of the gestalt and the ENTIRE other side.

Serious question, do you feel that people having problems with "my character drives people insane and enslaves people as an evil elder brain" is actually that extreme a response?

The party makeup is predominantly good aligned. Those not good aligned include people who hold to freedom as one of their highest principles. Would it be so terrible to at least somewhat adjust to that?

In Pathfinder especially, even the developers note that race alignment is not universal. Nothing stops you from being a neutral elder brain. Nothing stops you from, if indeed it's all fluff, being an elder brain that doesn't do the sorts of things you note that he gets up to.

Nothing stops you from at least toning them down and still being evil. Cripes, if he was even like, some kind of alien thing that thralled and made crazy the willing who came to him for it, that would certainly be disturbing, but it would at least be more acceptable in a "doesn't make people feel you are doing terrible things that should be stopped" sort of way.

pragmatism: that was also meant as somewhat of a joke, and i hope you can take this as somewhat of a joke as well, but a creature that is insane is not necessarily going to agree with a sane creature as far as what is and is not "pragmatic".

Once again, I'm not actually asking for you to justify your character's actions within their concept or race. I'm sure they make sense just fine as part of your character's concept or race. I am asking you to consider that they fit poorly with multiple characters in this group.

"Well he's insane" is nothing really more than again "this is my character, deal with it".

I'm not asking you to not be an elder brain. I'm not asking you to drop your evil alignment. I'm asking you to consider that "you should be forced to deal with me exactly as I am" is maybe not the best way to be approaching this.

I'm also noting that you seem to be treating as minor, major details as far as your character actions and how they should be viewed by others.

reminder: the GM was the one who originally suggested this race to me.

then my question goes out to the GM as well as why they feel an evil elder brain who makes people insane and enslaves people is a good fit with multiple characters in this group beyond a "we are forced to work with you and accept what you do" situation.

Peredur Anwyl wrote:

I'm honestly myself finding the whole Thoon thing mildly problematic, having read the backstory for the character. The guy bopping around enslaving people and spreading insanity and driving people insane and so forth, it's something of an extremely rough fit with my own character.

enslaving is a bit of a stretch. they are captured and then a tadpole is placed in their brain, whereby they transform into something new. It is all quite beautiful, actually.

That really doesn't actually address the issue of your character as regards the qualms the rest of us are having with them being anything but a rough fit with several other characters.

If anything that went and made it worse, you now both deprive them of freedom and previous personhood. And I'm not saying that to philosophically debate it with you, I'm saying that in a "doing that is a bad fit with multiple characters in this game".

There was a question in the initial app about "will your character foster group cohesion" and your answer seems to at this point be "yes, because he will treat the rest of the group like dupes he will conceal what he does and believes from". It may just be me, but the idea that my gaming experience with your character will be "your character's dupe" does not encourage me to want to much interact with your character. And if instead we otherwise just straight up know what you get up to, I don't see a lot of fun in having to accept/deal with that either.

I'm really not thrilled about all that. It makes your character exist in a level of default antagonism to several other characters, in that you're already now talking about how you've designed your character with considerations in advance to blocking your fellow players from being able to know much from him. I don't particularly feel like playing your character's dupe. I'm not really looking to game in a group with built in antagonism in character relationships from day 1.

To ask it another way, what do you feel playing this character in a group of nonevil to good characters adds to this group of characters? And I don't mean in a mechanics way. I'm not looking for an "I'm playing an elder brain and this is how they are" answer in that sort of perennial, I'm just playing my character sort of response people seem to give in situations like these. Several people have expressed concerns on a level of gameplay and your replies seem to read right now like "deal with it, this is my character".

If you're thinking "hey, pantheons have evil gods". They sure do. They are also things that exist in stories people read about, not games you are sharing as an experience with other players.

I can for instance picture some friction every so often between, say, Trazzle's individualism and freedom loving and Peredur's inclination towards order and nation building, but that's more a matter of something they might debate or mildly exasperate each other by. That's character stuff, sure. Thoon's activities and perspectives blast right past that. And I think on some level you know that as far as this character and interacting with even something basic like a typical party makeup, let alone this one more specifically, or you wouldn't be talking about how your build ninjas you out of anyone knowing what you get up to as your response to concerns about your concept, as far as waving away concerns like that with responses involving mechanics. It feels like basically completely dismissing the concern as having any validity because you can say how stats let you ignore it.

We're, or certainly I'm, not talking about mechanics, we're talking about things like cohesion, characters at least somewhat complementing each other, and being able to overall fit to make a group that resonates and is an enjoyable experience, as a group.

There's at least levels of evil, if you're hellbent on having an evil character, ones that might not require you having to point out that we'll never get to know what you get up to anyway because of your mechanics. If you even dropped the "creating thralls and robbing people of sanity", that would be something.

the brain is more of a neutral, pragmatic evil.

The guy spreads insanity and enslaves/"captures and transforms" people, that's not the most pragmatic of things.

Whereas for Peredur it's one of his big hallmarks of a great society, yeah.

I have knowledge as well, but like I say, don't mind the overlap at all. I much imagine Trazzle and Peredur have completely different perspectives on that whole aspect of things anyway.

Which reminds me, I'm still finalizing my own crunch stuff and all (and might just take the template down one track ultimately), but I think most of our character backstories are up.

Now seems like a good time to eyeball each other's and to express concerns/ask questions anyone might have on them amongst the group.

I mean, the GM can ultimately say we're all forced to work together by the circumstances regardless, sure, but that's less of an amicable situation than it is, well, the characters having to play being forced to work together, or otherwise some characters having to treat the others like dupes and conceal what they do, and any other sort of thing.

I'm honestly myself finding the whole Thoon thing mildly problematic, having read the backstory for the character. The guy bopping around enslaving people and spreading insanity and driving people insane and so forth, it's something of an extremely rough fit with my own character.

I'm myself okay with something like domain overlap. I'd figure that such domains as have been picked were intended to be reflective of conceptual stuff, in that sense, a domain might overlap, but the particular character's implementation/interpretation of the notions behind it and why it ties into them provide differentiation.

With that said, was looking to go with knowledge, strength, protection, nobility and good. I could switch out strength for war and good for glory, if that helps anyone all the same.

I'll drop the cohort then if everyone would rather it be avoided. Opens up a feat slot I s'pose.

Battle Scion and Rogue 4/Paladin 3/Fighter 7 (buckler duelist) as my classes. Pretttty much melee stuff with some mild ranged capacity from the force blasts and such.

Oh, and put my backstory and description in the profile. As far as the notion of if the characters have run into each other previously, it might be better to go with not necessarily. I can't really picture my character having much previously bopped around with a neutral evil elder brain for instance.

Apologies if this was already asked and I missed it, if you take a cohort (and we're allowed to have cohorts) and they have levels, are they done as gestalt as well?