Hoito |
A bit of backstory first, our game has three players. Each of us doing our best to keep our characters moving forward, towards their goals. Last night two characters had a big argument (paladin called it a discussion). The paladin who worships Iomedae has finally gotten tired of the Half-Orc Ranger(Chaotic Neutral) and the way he does things. The ranger is tired of the paladin giving orders, and always dragging the party off to do good for no profit. The third character is a cleric to Sarenrae and matches her alignment. He wants to do good, but is a bit more forgiving with the ranger's way of doing things.
After a fight with undead in a necropolis, and an ambush by the ranger. The ranger obtained a magical device that commanded undead. The ranger initially wanted to use the undead against the evil cultist camped close by, who sent the undead against him in the first place. The others, did not like that plan. The ranger was told the the undead must be put to rest, and that returning them to the graves they had come from was the right thing to do. The ranger agreed and commanded them to return to their graves. Though the way it was done is the questionable part. He commanded them to run through the campsite, then to return to their place of eternal rest. He used them as a distraction enabling the party to set an ambush for the evil cultists who came out of the camp. The party, including the paladin did take part in the ambush.
Once in a safe area/on the way to a safe area, the paladin proceded to state that the tactics used by the half-orc are not welcome and that if he keeps it up either the paladin or the ranger must go. The cleric stayed out of it, and anytime he was mentioned he would begin a conversation with the NPCs.
I am the player of the ranger and I play the character like a mercenary. I try to take the path of least resistance when possible. I have let brigands and thieves get away because they did not pose a threat to me, I have stopped fights with intimidation, and have even talked the paladin and cleric out of a jail cell. They didn't like the fact that a town was under protection by an inquisitor of Asmodeus. They went in looking for a fight and both wanted to kill the man, and would burn half the town to do it. The Ranger does have an opportunity to leave and run off with an NPC at this time.
Ok that was longer than I thought it would be... Now for the question/s
1. Does the ranger tell them to get bent, hire some other lackey to do the dirty work? Or does he stay and still tell the paladin to get bent?
2. If he leaves the ranged damage of the party goes way down. Is ranged damage that necessary?
3. I have so many characters made and ready to go. How do I choose one to replace the ranger, if that is what happens.
Now I am looking for feedback on how you would play it. I know it is my game and character to do with as I please. I am just looking for how others would handle the situation. If further information is needed I can provide whatever you require.
Nuclearsunburn |
1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A group that really tries to play their characters.. -wistful look-
In any case..I would suggest first of all talking to the paladin's player out of character about this and how you want it to resolve. If it's not causing actual "enjoying the game" issues for anyone it could be a fun thing to try to work through. Are you bored with the ranger? It sounds like you're kind of just looking for an excuse to play something else at this point. Make sure your DM is okay with that and won't passively aggressively take it out on a replacement.
1 - This is what you and the paladin player need to discuss out of character. What will be the most interesting and fun for both of you?
2 - not particularly. It's just gravy, honestly anything you replace it with in this group would be fine. an arcane caster might even be better.
3 - Well, how you choose one is based on a few things. If you enjoyed the conflict with the paladin you can pick something sort of the same.. if you want more harmony you can pick something more morally in tune with the rest of the party. Conflict like that CAN be fun in a party if everyone is on board with it, or it can be a source of annoyance. You know the people you're playing with better than I do. From an optimization standpoint, replacing it with a full arcane sorcerer would round out the party pretty well.
Hoito |
Thanks for the reply Nuclearsunburn,
The paladin player and I are friends and have played a few games together, and this situation happened pretty fast and I don't think he or I were looking for an out with our characters. Though after a few days of thought I came to the realization that this could be a good break point for this character.
I tend to make a metric assload of characters, for many different games as it is one way I learn the rules a bit faster. During that process I try to come up with ideas on how the character would be played, and interacts with the other characters, and sometime a good idea hits and I don't want it to be wasted.
The other players and I do get a kick out of internal strife with the party, and some of my fondest memories are of the exchanges that happen during such times.
Calybos1 |
If the players are enjoying the back-and-forth, there's no problem with any decision you make on whether to stay or replace your guy.
If it's actually bogging down the game, the players need to figure out a way for the characters to hash out their differences and work together, or to break up the party one way or the other.
If the players are the ones having the interpersonal conflict, no tweaking of character abilities or RP interaction will fix that. You might need to learn to avoid each others' triggers and start fresh with an all-new game.
What do the third player and the GM think of all this? Are they enjoying it, tolerating it, or getting fed up?
Hoito |
The third player sits back and watches. Out of character we all get along and have no problems with each other. The paladin's player and I are texting back and forth about a game he runs on Thursday nights. I figure if he had a problem he wouldn't ask me.
The GM is doing the same thing the third player is, he just sits back and watches the exchange. I think they both enjoy the back and forth that goes on. It is very much like the old "Who's on first." skit. We feed off of each other well and get each other laughing at our comments, and jokes about each others characters.
I will talk to the third player and the GM and try to figure out where they stand on the issue. As for the other player involved I think he may be looking for an out as well as I know a few weeks ago he was having problems figuring out his character, and how to play him.
Level 1 Commoner |
I see no need for a switch. But I do see a great opportunity for character development of the Paladin and your Ranger. You only used some shady tactics versus dangerous opponents and did not burn down an orphanage. Just let the characters sit down and work out a solution both can live with like adults (hopefully) do.
Hoito |
Oh Nuclear if I did that it would have to be recorded and put up on youtube...
I have talked to the other player and can confirm that is character will not budge on his stance, my characters new goal is to make the paladin out to be the bad guy. Not sure how that will happen yet, but we have a week break from playing so I have some time.