|
The paladin thread got me thinking (and I don't want to threadjack)...
There seems to be a common trend of paladins clashing with other, non-good party members. It seems like not a lot of people play LG (apart from paladins, some clerics, and probably some monks).
Does anyone have any experience with staunchly LG wizards, rogues, or other classes without alignment restrictions?
What about other unusual class/alignment restrictions? I'd love to hear some stories.
Before the aforementioned (LN) cleric of Wee Jas, Kalem, I played a LG Rogue/Fighter in my friend Bill's campaign. His name was Verick Crowne, and my backstory was that I had been sent, by Pelorian authorities, to investigate a Paladin of theirs (Sir Chip) that had been involved in several questionable incidents, including the fireballing of a whole village of ersatz peasants.
I kind of patterned him after Jack Bristow, from the TV show Alias. Tight lipped, confident, untrusting and unflinching in the line of duty, but always with the welfare of others in mind, especially those close to him.
He was ruthlessly slain by an unfortunate trap (*shakes fist at Bill*), but his investigation proved only that Sir Chip was acting with Pelor's interest in mind and could not have prevented the actions of his chaotic companion. Turned out they weren't really peasants anyway, so it wasn't as bad as all that. I am very interested in the archetype of LG Rogues, and was pleased as pie that 3d edition paved the way for relaxed alignment restrictions, creating interesting multi-class choices (Ranger/Paladin, Paladin/Rogue, Monk/Druid, etc. with the right feat combos in the right settings of course)
As a DM, I always keep track of player's actions and how they affect alignment (in secret) and warn them when they are playing their alignment differently. Two warnings and they have a shift of alignment, with attendant results to their class, etc. I don't give the warnings blithely, say at every ten increments (i.e: ten spells with the evil descriptor with no intervening redeeming actions = warning #1) but my ruling is absolute and at that point if they wish to regain their former alignment, it is in their power to do so by atonement, a quest for their patron deity or something along those lines. If they wish to shift, I begin tracking their new alignment from there.
I encourage players to avoid stereotypes and do so in my own characterisation of NPC's. The Good cleric can be aloof and insensitive owing to pressure or distraction, while the Evil creature can show some compassion for its companions without suddenly repenting. For this reason, I enjoy playing Neutral characters, but the above example of an LG rogue was so much fun it ranks as one of my favorite post 3E gaming experiences.
I of course didn't tell the Paladin he was being investigated, but posthumously, I told the player and he looked at me with an admiring and humerous:
"You bastard, I thought Sir Chip and Verick were friends"
I replied by saying:
"They were, but had you been a fallen paladin as the church suspected, I wouldn't have hesitated to kill you. At least you didn't have to worry about
it happening in the dead of night. I would have done it honorably, facing you and telling you what a loss to the church it would be."
*shrug* hope that's relevant...
Hmm; I would tend to agree with the first post; LG is mostly monks and paladins and clerics if they need it for a specific choosen diety; i alter paladins a bit in my game so that any diety that has paladin as a class can have paladin followers of that dieties alignment.
What about other unusual class/alignment restrictions? I'd love to hear some stories.
I think the most memorable situation I've been in was in the 2nd Ed Vecna Lives! module. The DM used the priest of Iuz as a replacement character instead of a NPC and the byplay between him and the paladin was quite interesting. Luckily, the DM and I (the paladin) set the ground rules early on the paladin's code and the conditions of the truce under which the Iuz priest was allowed to adventure with the party. It also helped that the player running the Iuz priest was more mature than one of the "I'm evil! I try to kill the rest of the party and take their stuff!" types.
This one has not gone beyond the concept stage, yet: CG Half-Orc Rogue/Cleric (Garl Glittergold), raised by gnomes, inveterate prankster. One of the players I game with said, "WHAT?!," and collapsed in helpless laughter.
RPG Superstar 2013 Top 32
|
Here's mine:
CG rogue who was an utter, utter coward. He had no combat-related feats whatsoever (not even Weapon Finesse, despite a 22 Dex and a 14 Str). He had Skill Focus (Bluff), Skill Focus (Sleight of Hand), Smooth Talk (FRCS - +2 Bluff and Diplomacy), etc. etc. ad nauseum. His skill levels were UNBEATABLE. In any skill which he had focuses (i.e. max or near-max ranks), he was able to routinely defeat DCs of 30 or higher by level 10. He was a pickpocket, a liar, and a cheat. However, he was also very good at providing distractions and saving his friends when necessary.
Two of the skills that he had well over a +20 bonus in were Hide and Move Silently. Evil wizard plotting to destroy a village? Sneak into wizard's tower, bypass guards and traps all by himself, assassinate wizard with vicious sneak attacks thanks to his ring of invisibility, and return to the party triumphant before they even woke up the next morning.
"Thesus, why are you still sleeping?! We mustn't waste time! Who knows when the wizard will make his attack?"
"Ohh.. mmm... right... I already killed him. You can go back to bed."
"...what?!?"
"Yeah... last night. Go and see for yourself if you want. Wake me up for dinner."
Whenever there was a large battle, Thesus was nowhere to be found. He would only fight if he had no other choice. Sand in the eyes, blinding powder, smokesticks, wands of blindness/deafness, his ring of invisibility, feint and hide, etc. etc. The party resented him for being such a damn coward but the players thought he was genius. My favorite line:
"Thesus, I have no idea why we continue to tolerate your cowardly presence."
"Simple, Julliard. Because you will find no one else who is as good as me at everything you can't do."
This was a character in other system than D&D, but anyway...I played a healer who was NE (or possibly CE).
She was very pragmatic and self-centered, calculating everything so that it helped her in the long run. Which meant that she took care of the rest of the group because they would help her to reach her goals (get enough power to really kick some @$$).
She also healed commoners around them if there was not too much trouble because having their gratitude is useful and helps to get her good reputation...
So she did her job well, but she couldn't care less about other people other than what use were they for her. Other group did sort of like her even if there definitely was something off-putting in her...
Oh, and naturally she also had extensive knowledge how to hurt other people as well as heal, and eventually betrayed the rest of the group when the profit became high enough to justify it.
This was a character in other system than D&D, but anyway...I played a healer who was NE (or possibly CE).
She was very pragmatic and self-centered, calculating everything so that it helped her in the long run. Which meant that she took care of the rest of the group because they would help her to reach her goals (get enough power to really kick some @$$).
She also healed commoners around them if there was not too much trouble because having their gratitude is useful and helps to get her good reputation...
So she did her job well, but she couldn't care less about other people other than what use were they for her. Other group did sort of like her even if there definitely was something off-putting in her...Oh, and naturally she also had extensive knowledge how to hurt other people as well as heal, and eventually betrayed the rest of the group when the profit became high enough to justify it.
To me this sounds like more of LE; LE is a very calulating alignment and has the discipline to help other if it servers its needs even if that is only to make a cover or smoke screen.
To me this sounds like more of LE; LE is a very calulating alignment and has the discipline to help other if it servers its needs even if that is only to make a cover or smoke screen.
Hmm, yes, depends a bit on the interpretation on law-chaos axis. Her inner discipline definitely was lawful, her attitude to rules of society was less so (even if she preferred to act like she was LG or at least LN...). And no annoying paladins in the game who could do detect evil on her :)