I've been GM'ing for a group of friends recently, two sessions ago they were informed of a Striga terrorizing a village and accepted the job of curing the creature (a 7 year old girl) of its affliction. Yesterday the party faced to Striga and cured it.
Before I go any further let me give you some info about the party:
- Echo: Dwarf Cleric of Pharasma
- Locke: Halfling Rouge
- El: Human Barbarian
- Malkior: Half-Elf Magus
Ok so Yesterday after curing the Striga and it reverted back to a young 7 year old girl the party took the girl back to her father, the Governor, carried on Malkior's back. Upon Receiving payment from the Governor, bag of gems and jewels worth 6000gp, Echo proceeded to smashing the young girl's skull in with his Masterwork Gold Gem-Encrusted Amethyst Spiked Morning Star (long story), rationalizing it as the girl had returned to the dead so Pharasma would be against her existence. The Governor proceeded to call for the guards, devastated and enraged by Echo's action, as the guards came in to attack Echo Locke ran into a corner choosing not to take sides, El grabbed Echo, and Malkior readied an action so that if Echo resists he would use shocking grasp on him. Echo proceeded to surrender and was sent to prison. While in prison Locke visited Echo in prison and was permitted to enter his cell, with the catch that it would then be locked until he called for the guard when he was ready to leave. Locke proceeded to pick the lock and let Echo out of his cell until he decided he had no viable way of sneaking him out, Echo returned to his cell and Locke walked out and was promptly questioned by the guard about how he left the cell without it being unlocked for him. After accepting Locke's excuse the guard went to the cell and tried to question Echo, which lead to a Sound Burst being cast at the guard and Echo being knocked unconscious. Afterward Echo proceeded to meditate and ask Pharasma for guidance, to only be told to wait, and then attack and kill a barbarian in the next cell who killed 10 men before being caught. Meanwhile the remaining members of the party contacted the guild they are a member of asking what they should do about the situation with Echo, only to be told to leave him to the justice system of the city. The guard called for reinforcements and his former party members were called for after seeing he has some prowess with magic. Locke refused to go saying he won't kill a companion, Malkior attacked and delivered the finishing blow to him, and El just watched, during all of this Echo just sat in the corner after casting Sanctuary and calmly talk to his old companions perfectly calm and content as he was being slashed and burned by guards and a flaming sphere from Malkior.
What do yall think of the events that transpired and how would yall react?
~Aod43254
Interesting story.The one I can't clear out is if he (the dwarf) did this based on out of game situations or in game ones.
If the dwarf was being played like a zealot of his religion I would ask for the reason of why didn't he do this in the first place (kill the girl from the start)if he couldn't I would cut him xp for not killing the girl from the start and give him for killing it at last.I wouldn't had cut him xp at all (and just have given him) if he had a reason why he didn't do this from the start.As the dwarf was a wise person I might had cut him xp if he hadn't a good reason for doing it right there (in front of the governor)and not roleplaying his dwarf's stats properly.
Otherwise the same as the plot went through at least at the first scene: the guards would have tried to lock him up or more logically for most nations of the past kill him outright and if he survived he survived.Radical beliefs can make you enemies easily as your acts seem erratic before the eyes of the common beholder.It is fun to play that kind of guys but it's hard too.
|
Killing any child in front of a ruler. Bad idea. If they did it where he cold not have seen. He wold have taken them at there word after a few bluff checks. doing it in front of him. They are all dead time for new characters. And no the ruler will not care about the back story of what hapend. All he knows is they saved his child and then killed her after they recived there gold. He wold not have sent just one of them to prison. Rember this is back befor due process guilt by assocation is fine by them. Put them down there long enough to get there head choped of or somthing to that effect. And rember if he knows there spell casters first thing he wold have done is have there hands cut off. So they can't cast spells.
Some time players need to learn. Actions even in a fantasy seting have a cost. This is one of thows times. They did somthing that stupped they should die for it.
|
|
Wait, so the guys get the money, and suddenly the dwarf's fervor rings at the door, and he kills the governor's daughter in front of his eyes ? Why didn't he do it before ? For teh goldz pisses ?
Well, the governor would have him killed right now if he even attempted to resist, or imprisoned for judgement in the deepest s$%~hole he could find in the dungeon, under heavy and intelligent guard protection. Special traitor/criminal treatment. A bard would sing the event to the people to fire their hate for the children-killer dwarf, maybe even inviting popular jury to assist to the judgement, making sure everyone knows his apparence.
Oh, and the governor would be sure to kindly ask the rest of the group to leave with half their recompense and never come back in front of him. If the players want to save their pal before he's executed, they can try. Not sure everyone would survive this mission, though. And I don't think the children-killer dwarf is worth being lynched by the guards and the town's people...
|
|
How would a parent react to seeing his child gruesomely murdered in front of him, in cold blood, by some self righteous, heretical fanatic? How would people serving to uphold said parent's security react to a dangerous madman that just murdered a helpless child?
Absolute lethal force from the guards, on the spot, no hesitation. No imprisonment, no trial, just the outrage of a father and his guards that just saw a child callously murdered by someone who just betrayed their trust.
The only way the rest of the party can escape the same treatment is if they immediately and obviously express shock and turn on the dwarf themselves, and even then it's going to be understandably hairy for them after the justified killing of the dwarf is done.
If that strikes the player as unfair, tough @#$%. Murdering children in front of people has consequences.
EPILOGUE
Pharasma punches him in his soul's kidney for doing it wrong.
I'd talk to the player. Did he know what the consequences would be? Does he feel so constrained by his religion that he thought his character would do that anyway? Is he just doing whatever seems funny because he assumes nothing bad will ever happen?
|
|
Murdering children in front of people has consequences.What ?
How am I supposed to have fun in my fantasy with these preposterous conditions ?!EVIL, I SAY !
Evil maybe, but dammit we have standards.
ALSO, all of the dwarf's belongings and wealth are confiscated by the mayor to go towards his daughter's raising if possible.
Dwarf's body is burned entirely and the ashes thrown into a pig trough.
Furthermore, the reward that was originally going to the party is rescinded, both to help fund the child's raising and because hte party brought a psycho child killer into their midst.
Mainstream church of Pharasma is contacted and informed that there was a dangerous heretic in their ranks and they need to put their damn house in order.
Ok so Yesterday after curing the Striga and it reverted back to a young 7 year old girl the party took the girl back to her father, the Governor, carried on Malkior's back. Upon Receiving payment from the Governor, bag of gems and jewels worth 6000gp, Echo proceeded to smashing the young girl's skull in with his Masterwork Gold Gem-Encrusted Amethyst Spiked Morning Star (long story), rationalizing it as the girl had returned to the dead so Pharasma would be against her existence.
If I remember correctly your Stirga interpretation it wasn't Undead but Monstrous Humanoid or something like that (AFAR it had Constitution score). So what happened is that party removed terrible curse from child and then the dwarf killed innocent uncursed child. Pharasma won't be pleased by this particular (now probably ex-) Cleric.
Morality of killing innocent children aside his actions were abysmally stupid from the point of planning and organization: if he really belived that the child should be sent to its afterlife for being cursed instead of removing the curse he should act earlier (in the Witcher original short story where he fights Stirga there are courtiers of the king who suggest that Geralt should kill the Stirga and tell the king that curse could not be removed - they had political reasons to do so, however). If the thought that uncursed child is some kind of unholy abomination occured to him after delivering it to its father thn he should plan something. Unless he played very stupid, suicidaly fantaic character. Then it matches his actions.
I got the impression from the story that the player had his character commit "suicide by cop", and (perhaps unintentionally) took down another party member with him. Did the player, in other ways, express frustration or disappointment with his character?
He killed her after receiving payment because from the start he had planned to have the character be greedy, being easily swayed by gold or gems/jewels. He claims that he had expected that the rest of his party would assist him against the guards, but quite frankly I have no idea why he expected that.
Drejk, you are right the Striga was a Monstrous Humanoid, the player rationalized that if Pharasma is against undead then she would be against resurrection as well, so he ran his character with sort of an extreme to the anti-undead beliefs so any return to life is considered wrong and should be killed, and since the girl who became the Striga was stillborn he saw it as she must be killed since she had come back to life.
His only other argument was that she had been killing people as the striga, but as I pointed out to him they had cured her of the affliction causing her to do so and that she wasn't in control of her actions at the time, and that if he wanted that to be a valid answer he should have killed her before the sun came up and they had cured her of the affliction.
~Aod43254
If I were the DM of this player I'd have Pharasma send the Steward of Skein to deal with the now ex-cleric dwarf. Pharasma loathes killing, as it prevents the soul from reaching their destiny in this live, and most of her clerics avoid fighting as much as they can, and never use their sacred daggers to do so. Furthermore, if Pharasma was against raising the dead, NO ONE would ever come back.
Death Gods in Fantasy Roleplaying:
Causing catastrophic complete misunderstandings of their tenets by casual players since 1974
|
|
Death Gods in Fantasy Roleplaying:
Causing catastrophic complete misunderstandings of their tenets by casual players since 1974
What ?
My god is a god of DEATH !!1! so I keel. Seems pretty logicalz to me. Don't ever tell me preposterous lies like these, or I will keel you to please my dark immortal death god of dying death's death.Evil maybe, but dammit we have standards.
Sure, my standard longsword is just the standard size.
Perfect for a little head.Or even a tiny one.
Or even a not yet fully formed one.
damn sick EVIL, I SAY !
His only other argument was that she had been killing people as the striga, but as I pointed out to him they had cured her of the affliction causing her to do so and that she wasn't in control of her actions at the time, and that if he wanted that to be a valid answer he should have killed her before the sun came up and they had cured her of the affliction.
Had he voiced that opinion from the begining or only after being confronted with consequences of his action?
In this he could be partly right as not every society accepts reduced or no resposibility because of limited capacity to recognize right or wrong. Historically it is rather a novelty - however being able to "prove" that black magic forced you to do bad things were possible bargaining chip in court: victim of black magic could be put to extreme penance to be purified of sin and corruption but would not be killed in most cases - of course there were no hard and fast rules as much relied on judges discretion.
If I were the DM of this player I'd have Pharasma send the Steward of Skein to deal with the now ex-cleric dwarf. Pharasma loathes killing, as it prevents the soul from reaching their destiny in this live, and most of her clerics avoid fighting as much as they can, and never use their sacred daggers to do so. Furthermore, if Pharasma was against raising the dead, NO ONE would ever come back.
I would say that the curse deprived that girl from being able to reach her destiny in life and thus releasing her to let her live her life was right thing to do according to Pharasma's tenets.
What ?
My god is a god of DEATH !!1! so I keel. Seems pretty logicalz to me. Don't ever tell me preposterous lies like these, or I will keel you to please my dark immortal death god of dying death's death.
Your god is dead god. Bhaal kicked the bucket many years ago. Deal with it.
|
|
Your god is dead god. Bhaal kicked the bucket many years ago. Deal with it.
For your lies, behold the deadly gaze of death's God, Death.
It gives nightmares !
bump
Your god is dead god. Bhaal kicked the bucket many years ago. Deal with it.For your lies, behold the deadly gaze of death's God, Death.
It gives nightmares !
That made me literally laugh out loud
His only other argument was that she had been killing people as the striga, but as I pointed out to him they had cured her of the affliction causing her to do so and that she wasn't in control of her actions at the time, and that if he wanted that to be a valid answer he should have killed her before the sun came up and they had cured her of the affliction.Had he voiced that opinion from the begining or only after being confronted with consequences of his action?
He only voiced that opinion after being confronted and being placed in the prison to await being killed in a sick and cruel way.
~Aod43254
I've been GM'ing for a group of friends recently, two sessions ago they were informed of a Striga terrorizing a village and accepted the job of curing the creature (a 7 year old girl) of its affliction. Yesterday the party faced to Striga and cured it.
... Upon Receiving payment from the Governor, bag of gems and jewels worth 6000gp, Echo proceeded to smashing the young girl's skull......
I would be interested in what level the pc's are. At higher levels it might be a symptom of, "I can do what I want and normal rulers and guards can't stop me".
I probably would have looked at the player and said, "Do you really want to do that?" To give the other players out-of-character time to react to his characters action. This is a campaign altering event and doing so without consulting the other players, or at least giving them in-character warnings is, IMO, bad gaming. And the impression I get from the story is that the character pulled this stunt out-of-the-blue with no warning.
If he persisted, his character would have died (killed while "tying to escape") or become an npc villian.
I've been GM'ing for a group of friends recently, two sessions ago they were informed of a Striga terrorizing a village and accepted the job of curing the creature (a 7 year old girl) of its affliction. Yesterday the party faced to Striga and cured it.
... Upon Receiving payment from the Governor, bag of gems and jewels worth 6000gp, Echo proceeded to smashing the young girl's skull......I would be interested in what level the pc's are. At higher levels it might be a symptom of, "I can do what I want and normal rulers and guards can't stop me".
I probably would have looked at the player and said, "Do you really want to do that?" To give the other players out-of-character time to react to his characters action. This is a campaign altering event and doing so without consulting the other players, or at least giving them in-character warnings is, IMO, bad gaming. And the impression I get from the story is that the character pulled this stunt out-of-the-blue with no warning.
If he persisted, his character would have died (killed while "tying to escape") or become an npc villian.
All of the characters were level 3 at the time of the event so I doubt it was that he thought he could do whatever he wanted. If he hadn't pulled the stunts in prison (killing another inmate and Sound Blasting the guard) I was considering having the character return as an npc.
He told me today that he had planned to explain his actions, if the party had helped him, as a temporary psychosis due to a the conflict between his desire for gold and shiny stuffs and his religious views.
I would have had the character executed or taken away and turned into a villainous NPC and probably asked the player not to roll up a replacement. If I were one of the other PCs I'd strongly consider leaving the group. Certainly I have trouble imagining myself playing any character that would be willing to adventure with someone so obviously unhinged as to act as Echo did. Normal people don't even consider things like that. The player is, at best, not seeing the NPCs as characters which is fine in some contexts, but is not what I'd want at my table for a serious RPG.
If I were GMing the actual event I think I'd let the other PCs sense motive to get the chance to roll initiative and intervene. And probably give an ad-hoc initiative penalty for sudden loss of clericness to stack the deck in favor of the other PCs. Then if the ex cleric escaped I'd take him away and use him as a villain.
I wouldn't ask the player to leave the group since he is a friend and our entire group is a random bunch. So I should have expected something like this from him but didn't realize that it was a somewhat predictable action until after it happened.
And if you wouldn't mind define exactly what a normal person is.
~Aod43254
Actually just sounds like someone trying to blow up your game. I would probably kill his character on the spot and have the ruler's cleric heal the girl before she died. I would then take your friend to the side, ask him if he still wanted to play in the game. If he did, I would tell him that he wouldn't be able to make a character till the next game. I would then make sure the rest of the group got huge awards for not helping to destroy your campaign and I would make echo's player start at 1st level. Oh yeah, I would explain to him if he tried something like that again, he wouldn't be playing in my game again.
He told me today that he had planned to explain his actions, if the party had helped him, as a temporary psychosis due to a the conflict between his desire for gold and shiny stuffs and his religious views.
I told a friend this, and he laughed out loud. We talked about it and are in agreement, the fact that his character thought the girl should die is possibly a reasonable (if not a very good) character motivation. But his choice of time and place to act on it was chaotic-stupid, foolish and selfish - in a "hog the spotlight/make the campaign about MY characters actions/it's what my character would do" way.
Actually just sounds like someone trying to blow up your game. I would probably kill his character on the spot and have the ruler's cleric heal the girl before she died. I would then take your friend to the side, ask him if he still wanted to play in the game. If he did, I would tell him that he wouldn't be able to make a character till the next game. I would then make sure the rest of the group got huge awards for not helping to destroy your campaign and I would make echo's player start at 1st level. Oh yeah, I would explain to him if he tried something like that again, he wouldn't be playing in my game again.
I honestly believe that he wasn't trying to break the game and that he was doing what he believed his character would or at the very least doing what he believed would allow him to be both greedy and true to his religion (or at least his interpretation of it).
I told a friend this, and he laughed out loud. We talked about it and are in agreement, the fact that his character thought the girl should die is possibly a reasonable (if not a very good) character motivation. But his choice of time and place to act on it was chaotic-stupid, foolish and selfish - in a "hog the spotlight/make the campaign about MY characters actions/it's what my character would do" way.
I will not argue that his action was chaotic-stupid, as I stated above he was expecting to fulfill his religious beliefs and his greedy nature, acting for himself and not what was the smartest action.
~Aod43254
When he was in jail he would have been isolated. I would not have allowed his buddies to chill with him. Honestly I don't even know if he would have made it to the jail. That would depend on the kingdom.
There is a good 99% chance that the character would end up dead. I can not think of anyway that he would not be dead.
PS:I tell my players to be prepared to pay for the consequences of their actions. I think your player assumed he would get help from a metagame point of view. I would let the party know that helping him might get them killed.
Our group tends to be not very serious about roleplaying, so things like this tend to happen a bit, though I must admit, this particular scene was pretty crazy. There really wasn't a metagaming perspective on the player's part - the character in question had been established as being incredibly greedy (dwarf stereotype, no doubt), as well as a somewhat misguided zealot of his religion. I particularly liked how the GM had Pharasma told him to just "Wait" in his prison cell, because it was essentially his religion coming back to bite him. A proverbial middle finger, if anything.
My character (the magus) dealt the killing blow because he was particularly annoyed by Echo's actions, since the governor had suggested that he knew about a crime lord the group had been trying to gather information about. There really wasn't any camaraderie - the entire group was pretty disappointed in him, character wise.
For us, there were lulz to be had.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It seems like you did a great job of applying reasonable consequences to characters doing crazy stuff. Personally I would probably rule that the cleric became an ex-cleric the moment he killed the little girl. Although I would probably pause and explain to the player that smashing healthy little girls is not in the deity's portolio and give him a chance to decide if what he thought he was rping is the same as what everyone else at the table perceives it to be.
Your approach seems to have led to a lot of fun for the players though, as long as there are no hard feelings out of character for the pvp involved. My particular group would probably have had trouble on that point. If your group doesn't have that problem then keep up the good work.
|
Actually just sounds like someone trying to blow up your game. I would probably kill his character on the spot and have the ruler's cleric heal the girl before she diedAgreed (and doable unless he coup de graced with his MW mace).
I will not argue that his action was chaotic-stupid, as I stated above he was expecting to fulfill his religious beliefs and his greedy nature, acting for himself and not what was the smartest action.
Whether it was the smartest action isn't the point, but whether it was the most mind-boggling impractical and idiotic thing he could have possibly done which was guaranteed to have dire repercussions.
As a cleric, it is a requirement of the class that he be wise.
-- As a measure of one's recognition of what it the most appropriate thing to do in any situation, let alone a social one, wisdom is the stat which matters.
As a DM, in a situation like this (in the PC is smarter than the player) is ask for wisdom check before he does what he's going to do. If he fails, or does it anyway, then....
Absolute lethal force from the guards, on the spot, no hesitation. No imprisonment, no trial, just the outrage of a father and his guards that just saw a child callously murdered by someone who just betrayed their trust.^^^ ...And the guards, if they're loyal, wouldn't wait for orders.
He told me today that he had planned to explain his actions, if the party had helped him, as a temporary psychosis due to a the conflict between his desire for gold and shiny stuffs and his religious views.
"Tell it to whatever Hellspawn you serve, murderer!"
<Several guards grapple and pin him; others run him through in as many coup de graces as it takes. Standard low-level STR:14 NPC guard with MW longsword and one-hand Power Attack automatically crits and does full double damage, or 2x(8+4)...which means two or three stabs, and he's done as a 3rd-level character.>
Now for the fun part.... <Guards detain everyone else, then DM calls for a short break while he decides what the governor is going to do.>
DM: "After a brief recess in which you are all unaware of your fates, His Grace now proceeds to render his decisions...."
First, the corpse of this scoundrel is to be taken immediately to the Arcanist's Guild, and there be fed to a summoned barghest or similar creature which devours souls and carries them off to a richly deserved foul place beyond the reach of restorative magicks.
<Guards immediately drag the body away.>
Secondly, the rewards bestowed for the safe return of Our daughter are rescinded, and the companions of this bastard shall owe Us a favor. Our heart is hardened by this act of wanton cruelty, and We are not disposed to listen to pleas of ignorance regarding prior knowledge of the motives of a murderous colleague.
Third, We have decided to ban this insidious cult of Pharasma, and hereby decree that it is a false faith and haven for lunatics and the death-obsessed. -- The favor that you are to owe Us, is that you shall travel the land delivering news of Our edict, and to put to the sword all who resist and to burn down their despicable temples.
To assist in this endeavor, and also to keep an eye on you, you shall be accompanied by persons within Our trust. Serve Us well, and your rewards shall be restored."
DM: "The governor waves his hand, and two armed men wearing emblems of his liege step forward, eying you suspiciously."
DM: "Joe?* Here's your new character. The other guy is an NPC.
(*Assume "Joe" is the player who ran the dwarf)
- - - - - -
1. "Joe"'s new character: Ranger2(archery,urban)/Cavalier1(Order of the Lion)
Archibald is an up-and-coming man-at-arms who has acquitted himself well in the eyes of his patron. While not yet exceptionally skilled in any particular direction, he has a broad range of abilities, no apparent physical or mental defects, and has demonstrated exceptional resiliency versus attempts to magically sway him from his appointed tasks.
Human; alignment LN; base stats: STR:12, DEX:17, CON:14, INT:12, WIS:12, CHA:12 (adjust stats upward evenly for a higher-than-20pt campaign).
Traits: Indomitable Faith, Armor Expert
Feats: Iron Will, Improved Iron Will, Weapon Finesse, Rapid Shot (Ranger2).
Skills, maxed: Handle Animal, Ride, Perception, Kn:Dungeoneering
Skills, other: Kn:Local, Kn:Nature, Survival
Favored enemy: Dwarves.
Equipment: mithril chainshirt +1, buckler +1, STR+1 composite longbow +1, MW cold-iron longsword, MW light mace, silver dagger, Warhorse(mount), MW scale-mail barding, various potions, scrolls, and mundane items. (Adjust equipment to power-level of campaign.)
Instruct "Joe" that his 4th level-up is to be cavalier2, but after that he can do what he wants.
.
2. The DM's party NPC: Paladin7.
Reginald is a fair-minded but no-nonsense Captain of the Guard with a reputation for sometimes interpreting his liege's orders with more leniency than perhaps his liege intended, and also for being utterly impervious to attempts to bribe or intimidate him from his appointed tasks. He is well liked by the decent citizens of the realm, and hated by thieves, bandits and other riff-raff whose intentions he has a seeming preternatural ability to ferret out.
Human; alignment LG; base stats: STR:16(18), DEX:12(14), CON:14(16), INT:12, WIS:12, CHA:12(16) (adjust stats upward evenly for a higher-than-20pt campaign).
Traits: Heirloom Weapon (Fauchard), Oregent Desperation
Feats: Power Attack, Furious Focus, Pushing Assault, Skill Focus: Sense Motive, Alertness
Skills, max: Sense Motive (+5 from SM+Al), Heal
Skills, others: Diplomacy, Kn:nobility, Handle Animal, Ride
Equipment: +2 mithril full-plate, Belt of Physical Perfection +2 (these first two items are the property of the liege, and accorded to Captains of the Guard), Headband of Alluring Charisma +4, MW STR+3 composite longbow, +1 keen, ghost touch fauchard (paladin bonded weapon), +1 keen cold-iron rapier, +1 adamantine heavy mace, Pearl of Power +1, Pearl of Power +2, Warhorse (always owns three), assortment of +1 defensive items (rings, cloaks, amulets, etc), various potions, scrolls, and mundane items. (Adjust equipment to power-level of campaign.)
Reginald will acquire XP at half the rate of the other PCs until they have caught up.
gah, I would stab the dm who handed me a pre-generated sheet and told me it was my character. Then, I would knock him/her unconscious with the CRB, and dm the campaign myself.
Then again, I wouldn't murder a child... Or if I did, it wouldn't be in plain view of ANYONE.
I think (or rather want to think) that the pre-generated character was so that player could still play in that session and that in the next one the player would be making a new one.
gah, I would stab the dm who handed me a pre-generated sheet and told me it was my character. Then, I would knock him/her unconscious with the CRB, and dm the campaign myself.
Then again, I wouldn't murder a child... Or if I did, it wouldn't be in plain view of ANYONE.
..Or you can just refuse to play and.. well do nothing
I did have a fair share of players at times not wanting to do anything rather than play another character for the session, instead of finishing a character before they come to the table or basically commiting suicide by doing something stupid.. fine if not, but I like to give the player an alternative rather than being bored or a disturbing factor for the rest of the players
|
Meh, I can whip up a new character in > 10 minutes and get back in the game. Besides, I thought the intent of my comment was pretty clear.
"and told me it was my character"
Not "asked me if I wanted to play this npc for a session", or "gave me the option to continue playing by taking over an npc or creating a new character"
Yes, I could refuse to play. I could get up and hit a fast food place. I could move to France and try my luck at environmental science.
But a dm who does not offer me the choice to make a character isn't a dm I would be playing with for long.
However, feel free to ignore intent in order to be argumentative :p