I am re-making an old high level character from back in the day who was a powerful noble, archmage, and fleshwarper. Said character possessed the Leadership feat and had a lich cleric cohort.
I would like to include this aspect of the character in the Pathfinder rendition, but I'm not sure how the lich template might interact with the cohort rules in Pathfinder.
How would I make this work without breaking or seriously bending any rules?
Zombie cleric!
Or if you want a more boney lich, skeleton cleric!
Close enough.
Zombie cleric!
Or if you want a more boney lich, skeleton cleric!
Close enough.
Actually, juju zombie or skeletal champion would work just as well (the character background being that the flesh warper helped to make his cohort into a more powerful servant). Still, how do templates interact with the cohort rules?
I don't have the book in front of me, but didn't the
*spoiler removed*
Damnit, now I know we'll be facing a
I don't have the book in front of me, but didn't the cyclops lich in Kingmaker have some kind of lesser lich template?Damnit, now I know we'll be facing a lich.
"lesser lich" and who the Hell know's what that means.
Still, how do templates interact with the cohort rules?
Perhaps reduce the maximum level of the cohort by the shift in CR from the template? So if applying a Celestial template (CR+1) your cohort could be at most 3 levels behind you instead of 2. That should compensate for the power shift.
I don't see a real lich wasting his time being anyone lackey, unless you are a lot more powerful them him and or/ have its soul. I could see one acting like your underling as it is part of his game to do so and keep his pawn( you) moving where he wants it
Now if ya crafted an lich-like undead minion, I could roll with that.
I don't see a real lich wasting his time being anyone lackey, unless you are a lot more powerful them him and or/ have its soul. I could see one acting like your underling as it is part of his game to do so and keep his pawn( you) moving where he wants it
Now if ya crafted an lich-like undead minion, I could roll with that.
Would the lich act as such even when its "master" was the one who turned him into a lich in the first place? (Which by extension, means that he probably has the phylactery.)
As for being "a lot more powerful," the old versions of the characters had the fleshwarper at 18th-level and the lich with 12 class levels.
The queen of Nex was turned into a lich by Nex himself, and she remain loyal. So, the precedent is there.
Honesty it would act like it served him, all the while working to bring him down and get its phylactery. A lich isn't human, it does not think Like a human. It is not loyal to you unless acting as such helps it in a goal.
You have a wild animal on a leash, as soon as it can it will turn to type and take what is it's and pay you back for all the indignity you, a mere mortal dared inflict upon it.
The queen of Nex was turned into a lich by Nex himself, and she remain loyal. So, the precedent is there.
She was a demi-god, givin life anew by a far more powerful undead lord. Then more or less giving a whole kingdom to run. She does not serve him as much as rule with him.
Still you are correct it does set a percedent
A lich isn't human, it does not think Like a human.
There is no evidence supporting that belief anywhere in the game. If you mean "he's not human" in the same way that "a serial killer isn't human" only then might I agree. It's a fine interpretation, just not one that is supported any more than others. Also, this particular lich used to be human before being give a great gift by his master.
It's also worth noting that, though his master isn't undead, he did possess the tomb-tainted soul feat which allowed him to be healed by negative energy and healed by positive energy. Anyone know how to duplicate those effects in Pathfinder?
I'm thinking of making the "master" an alchemist. they have a lot of weird flesh warper type abilities that would suit the character well.
Added some spoiler tags.
Thanks. It honestly didn't occur to me that they might be necessary until I read Cheapy's post.
Creative Director
|
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
This is actually something that goes beyond the expectations for the Leadership feat, even back in the 3.5 days. A lich is VERY powerful... it's very difficult to kill, can paralyze foes permanently with a touch, has some of the best damage reduction in the game (ESPECIALLY against monsters)... and on top of that has a minimum caster level of like 11th.
Looking at the list of monster cohorts on page 316 of the Bestiary, I'd say that the closest it comes would PROBABLY be a dragon, since those guys ALSO have full caster progression and a lot of really useful other defenses and offenses. But even taking the fastest caster level progression for a dragon while minimizing CR (at CR 17), that puts us at an old red dragons for 11th caster level, which would generate an effective cohort level of 25, meaning your character would have to be 27th level to get that dragon... or that lich.
Even if you feel that comparing a lich to a dragon is unfair... if we drop the dragon's CR to match the lich's, that STILL gives us an effective CR of 19. Just above a stone giant. And I suspect I'm not alone in thinking a baseline lich is a tougher foe than a baseline stone giant...
Anyway... all of this goes to say that a lich cohort is something that's probably too powerful for a character in Pathfinder... at least unless you delve beyond 20th level.
Which puts lich cohorts squarely into the category of "look to your GM for permission." But don't hold anything against him if he lets you do this and then after a few battles decides he made a mistake and wants to take your lich cohort away!
This is actually something that goes beyond the expectations for the Leadership feat, even back in the 3.5 days. A lich is VERY powerful... it's very difficult to kill, can paralyze foes permanently with a touch, has some of the best damage reduction in the game (ESPECIALLY against monsters)... and on top of that has a minimum caster level of like 11th.
Looking at the list of monster cohorts on page 316 of the Bestiary, I'd say that the closest it comes would PROBABLY be a dragon, since those guys ALSO have full caster progression and a lot of really useful other defenses and offenses. But even taking the fastest caster level progression for a dragon while minimizing CR (at CR 17), that puts us at an old red dragons for 11th caster level, which would generate an effective cohort level of 25, meaning your character would have to be 27th level to get that dragon... or that lich.
Even if you feel that comparing a lich to a dragon is unfair... if we drop the dragon's CR to match the lich's, that STILL gives us an effective CR of 19. Just above a stone giant. And I suspect I'm not alone in thinking a baseline lich is a tougher foe than a baseline stone giant...
Anyway... all of this goes to say that a lich cohort is something that's probably too powerful for a character in Pathfinder... at least unless you delve beyond 20th level.
Which puts lich cohorts squarely into the category of "look to your GM for permission." But don't hold anything against him if he lets you do this and then after a few battles decides he made a mistake and wants to take your lich cohort away!
What would be your thoughts on applying a lesser template to the cohort then, such as juju zombie or skeletal champion?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Also, this particular lich used to be human before being give a great gift by his master.
It does not matter what he was. The human he was is dead. He is not human, lichs are things of alien thought, they are not mortal, they are not human, they are unliving things without souls.
A lich is a human like a demon is a human. They both could have been one, but it has little bearing on what they now are. Look at the Harlot queen, do you honestly think she is the same being as Arazni? They share the same form, the same former life and same memories but they are not the same creature.
Also, this particular lich used to be human before being give a great gift by his master.It does not matter what he was. The human he was is dead. He is not human, lichs are things of alien thought, they are not mortal, they are not human, they are unliving things without souls.
A lich is a human like a demon is a human. They both could have been one, but it has little bearing on what they now are. Look at the Harlot queen, do you honestly think she is the same being as Arazni? They share the same form, the same former life and same memories but they are not the same creature.
Speculation and interpretation. Nothing more. Might be great for your games, but that doesn't mean it is a rule of some kind that must be applied to all games.
Don't make it into what it's not.
]Speculation and interpretation. Nothing more. Might be great for your games, but that doesn't mean it is a rule of some kind that must be applies to all games.
Don't make it into what it's not.
Incorrect. Read up on the lich, it is just as I said. Are you using the lich or refluffing the game mechanics?
The mechanics and the fluff are not separate, unless you are refluffing. but when you say "lich" you are not speaking of just the game mechanics, but the beast as a whole, just as when you say "vampire" it has fluff wired to it.
Your saying a name, but then saying "Oh vampires love puppies, live by drinking vodka and love sunlight" You are in fact using mechanics for a whole new monster.
So again are you talking of a lich or just a new beast using the lich mechanics?
]Speculation and interpretation. Nothing more. Might be great for your games, but that doesn't mean it is a rule of some kind that must be applies to all games.
Don't make it into what it's not.
Incorrect. Read up on the lich, it is just as I said. Are you using the lich or refluffing the game mechanics?
The mechanics and the fluff are not separate, unless you are refluffing. but when you say "lich" you are not speaking of just the game mechanics, but the beast as a whole, just as when you say "vampire" it has fluff wired to it.
Your saying a name, but then saying "Oh vampires love puppies, live by drinking vodka and love sunlight"
So again are you talking of a lich or just a new beast using the lich mechanics?
*Reads lich template in full*
Would you please provide quotes? I'm not sure what it is you are referring to exactly. I see no references anywhere in the lich's text like you describe.
|
Creative Director
|
What would be your thoughts on applying a lesser template to the cohort then, such as juju zombie or skeletal champion?This is actually something that goes beyond the expectations for the Leadership feat, even back in the 3.5 days. A lich is VERY powerful... it's very difficult to kill, can paralyze foes permanently with a touch, has some of the best damage reduction in the game (ESPECIALLY against monsters)... and on top of that has a minimum caster level of like 11th.
Looking at the list of monster cohorts on page 316 of the Bestiary, I'd say that the closest it comes would PROBABLY be a dragon, since those guys ALSO have full caster progression and a lot of really useful other defenses and offenses. But even taking the fastest caster level progression for a dragon while minimizing CR (at CR 17), that puts us at an old red dragons for 11th caster level, which would generate an effective cohort level of 25, meaning your character would have to be 27th level to get that dragon... or that lich.
Even if you feel that comparing a lich to a dragon is unfair... if we drop the dragon's CR to match the lich's, that STILL gives us an effective CR of 19. Just above a stone giant. And I suspect I'm not alone in thinking a baseline lich is a tougher foe than a baseline stone giant...
Anyway... all of this goes to say that a lich cohort is something that's probably too powerful for a character in Pathfinder... at least unless you delve beyond 20th level.
Which puts lich cohorts squarely into the category of "look to your GM for permission." But don't hold anything against him if he lets you do this and then after a few battles decides he made a mistake and wants to take your lich cohort away!
Power-wise, that's a bit less over the top. Flavor-wise though? I don't like it. Undead are things that necromancers can create, and they don't need leadership to do that. They just create their minions and that's that. From a purely flavor standpoint, I prefer leadership to be used to gain living humanoid-shaped (not necessarily humanoid type) cohorts, or to gain living monstrous mounts.
*Reads lich template in full*
Would you please provide quotes? I'm not sure what it is you are referring to exactly. I see no references anywhere in the lich's text like you describe.
So yes, not a lich, pure mechanics with full refluff. Got ya, a whole new creature.
|
From Gallows of Gallowspire Lich article
Some stumble upon lichdom with hope in their hearts, looking to further an otherwise good cause by “sacrificing” themselves to this fate. In every known case, this misguided approach has twisted the person to foul outlooks, if the process of getting there didn’t already. Perhaps it is a natural result of divorcing the body from the soul, but those who pass beyond death in this manner invariably turn to evil as they gradually lose touch with the concerns and feelings of mortals.
|
|
So yes, not a lich, pure mechanics with full refluff. Got ya, a whole new creature.
*Reads lich template in full*
Would you please provide quotes? I'm not sure what it is you are referring to exactly. I see no references anywhere in the lich's text like you describe.
while I do not always agree with RD (no offense intended), he is correct in this case. There is nothing in the lich "fluff" in the PRD that states that they think in alien ways.
In fact, I am sure that they left stuff like that out so that it does not force GM's into playing all liches the same way (a fact that I am happy with). This is the same as the fact that they do not say that all barbarians are like Conan.
[
while I do not always agree with RD (no offense intended), he is correct in this case. There is nothing in the lich "fluff" in the PRD that states that they think in alien ways.
He is just reskinning it, he often does that. But a vampire on the SRD does the same thing, the SRD never or rarely has fluff.
He is not using a lich, but a lich like undead. If he wanted the fluff its not hard to find, its one of the most well documented undead in the game.
[
while I do not always agree with RD (no offense intended), he is correct in this case. There is nothing in the lich "fluff" in the PRD that states that they think in alien ways.
He is just reskinning it, he often does that. But a vampire on the SRD does the same thing, the SRD never or rarely has fluff.
He is not using a lich, but a lich like undead. If he wanted the fluff its not hard to find, its one of the most well documented undead in the game.
Ah. So the fluff you are referencing is from previous editions of the game and other non-Pathfinder sources?
If so, your meaning makes a lot more sense.
Yes and no, much is older( like almost Evey other monster) but has been carried over, kevin mack even posted up something from pathfinder saying more or less the same thing.
They aren't human and no longer even have souls.
Now if ya want to look for some older reads, the old van richens guide to liches is a great read. All of those are, the vampire, werewolf and ancient dead books are just wonderful for any edition.
Also FR had the archlich, which often were good and the belorn( spelling?) which are an elvish lich like critter. Going lich-like but not a lich could be the way to go here that could change the templet to something in line with your level and allow something that better fits.
Edit: If your a fleshwrapper why make undead? why not make a crafted fleshwrapped minion?
If your a fleshwrapper why make undead? why not make a crafted fleshwrapped minion?
The character was a melting pot of ideas and odd rarely used mechanics.
As a whole, it actually made a pretty interesting and cohesive character despite all the eclectic abilities.
Yes and no, much is older( like almost Evey other monster) but has been carried over, kevin mack even posted up something from pathfinder saying more or less the same thing.
They aren't human and no longer even have souls.
Now if ya want to look for some older reads, the old van richens guide to liches is a great read. All of those are, the vampire, werewolf and ancient dead books are just wonderful for any edition.
Also FR had the archlich, which often were good and the belorn( spelling?) which are an elvish lich like critter. Going lich-like but not a lich could be the way to go here that could change the templet to something in line with your level and allow something that better fits.
Edit: If your a fleshwrapper why make undead? why not make a crafted fleshwrapped minion?
The book "Pathfinder Chronicles: the Great Beyond" has a sidebar on page 1 called "Souls and the Undead" which states that undead like liches do have their original mortal souls, so I would assume this applies to the Pathfinder "default" setting. The book "Pathfinder Chronicles: Undead Revisited" has a detailed article on liches, and states that they tend to spiral towards paranoia, madness and evil through their experiences as undead, but this does not necessarily make them more alien than a likely-evil fleshwarper alchemist could comprehend or stomach, at least to my mind. It also details a lich in the service of a more powerful being (a demon god, in this case). Of course, whether to go by these or by other sources is anyone's choice.
Libris Mortis agrees with SS I believe, and I know it is 3.5, but it makes sense. I have never heard of a lich that could be trusted though in any adventure or book. They work for someone because it is beneficial to do so. I trust them no more than I trust a demon, which I know would turn on me if it ever gained the power to take me down.
Honesty it would act like it served him, all the while working to bring him down and get its phylactery. A lich isn't human, it does not think Like a human. It is not loyal to you unless acting as such helps it in a goal.
You have a wild animal on a leash, as soon as it can it will turn to type and take what is it's and pay you back for all the indignity you, a mere mortal dared inflict upon it.
Anytime someone starts telling other people how certain monsters/classes/alignments have to be played I just roll my eyes and walk away. But not before thanking them, of course.
So. Thanks for policing folks trying to design a creative personality. I'm sure everyone appreciates your efforts at keeping us inside of a box.
I trust them no more than I trust a demon, which I know would turn on me if it ever gained the power to take me down.
Pretty much this, but I pointed it out because as you recall RD does not think a demon or devil would ever turn on his master, even if asked to hold his masters soul in a shiny box :)
Rule 1 for minions: Never make minions who will grow as powerful as you , smarter then you and who you have to blackmail to control. Then think you control and can trust them.
So. Thanks for policing folks trying to design a creative personality. I'm sure everyone appreciates your efforts at keeping us inside of a box.
Its a warning as anyone who is doing this is handing your GM one free "Please, oh please screw over my pc" card. Your not only asking him to do so, you have rented a billboard and hired sky writers to ask him to do so.
The book "Pathfinder Chronicles: the Great Beyond" has a sidebar on page 1 called "Souls and the Undead" which states that undead like liches do have their original mortal souls,
Well no, lichs do not have their mortal soul, but neither does it move on. Its trapped in the Phylactery. They have ripped the soul from thier body and stored it. The thing you call a lich,may have the memories of the person it was but it is soul-less
One of the Carrion Crown books had info on Zombie Masters, zombie Skeletal Champions, and Skeletal/Zombie Mages. My Gnome Necromancer was gonna get a Zombie Mage as a cohort since all He was making was Zombies and having them Carry his palanquin everywhere.
Well no, lichs do not have their mortal soul, but neither does it move on. Its trapped in the Phylactery. They have ripped the soul from thier body and stored it. The thing you call a lich,may have the memories of the person it was but it is soul-less
The soul is indeed in the phylactery (and here the fluff differs from at least some previous versions, where the soul used the phylactery as a kind of magic jars in between residing in undead bodies (hence stuff as needing a corpse handy near the phylactery to possess).
If I interpret you correctly, you mean that the soul, when in the phylactery, is not effectively part of the greater whole of the lich, so that it doesn't impact what the lich says or does. This is one possible way in which lichdom could work, but I cannot find material for Pathfinder (or 3.5 for that matter) stating that this is what the setting constructors intended. Another possibility is that the soul, while in the phylactery, can act much as it could when in a living creature, with the undead body being somewhat like a remote-controlled avatar.
This also gets into the question by what we mean by a soul. Some systems separate soul, spirit and/or mind as distinct entities - among RPGs notably the new World of Darkness line. I have gotten the impression that few D&D-like game settings do, however, often instead treating soul, spirit and mind as the same force or entity. From the sidebar I mentioned, it seems that possession of a soul is the common property of sentient versus mindless undead. This leads me tentatively to believe that the Pathfinder writers mean that the soul is what makes an undead sentient rather than mindless, and if this is the case, the model of lich-body-as-remote-controlled-avatar seems reasonable to me.
In the end, I guess it depends on what you want the setting to be like in this respect, though.
On a different note, I agree that having a lich that is magically and intellectually your superior hanging around as a servant is going to end poorly. In the OPs case, it seemed that the master, while mortal, was actually more powerful, however.
The soul is indeed in the phylactery (and here the fluff differs from at least some previous versions, where the soul used the phylactery as a kind of magic jars in between residing in undead bodies (hence stuff as needing a corpse handy near the phylactery to possess).
If I interpret you correctly, you mean that the soul, when in the phylactery, is not effectively part of the greater whole of the lich, so that it doesn't impact what the lich says or does. This is one possible way in which lichdom could work, but I cannot find material for Pathfinder (or 3.5 for that matter)
Well I do have PF#48 handy, and it covers this subject a bit
The foul spellcasters who achieve this state retain the clarity of their living minds while their souls remain in stasis, allowing eternal rebirth if at any point their physical bodies are destroyed.
And
In every known case, this misguided approach has twisted the person to foul outlooks, if the process of getting there didn’t already. Perhaps it is a natural result of divorcing the body from the soul, but those who pass beyond death in this manner invariably
turn to evil as they gradually lose touch with the concerns and feelings of mortals.
So yes, the soul is not in the body and not part of the lich
On a different note, I agree that having a lich that is magically and intellectually your superior hanging around as a servant is going to end poorly. In the OPs case, it seemed that the master, while mortal, was actually more powerful, however.
Yes but the OP is making two huge mistakes. One he was more powerful, not his "minion is ageless and without mortal needs to hinder his power building.
Two: He thinks the lich is still the same person he was before hand.
Re: the question RD asked earlier about having the character healed by negative energy/harmed by positive...
I know there is a way to do it, because I saw it today when I was browsing through my books, but they are at work and I don't remember which one it was....
I am pretty sure it was a feat in the Inner Sea World Guide though...
Somebody correct me if I am wrong.
Other ways I can think of offhand are the Dhampir race and the Knight of the Sepulcher archetype for antipaladins from UC... although neither of those seem appropriate to the character description.
I have a feeling there are other ways too though, but I can't remember off the top of my head
:)
Well I do have PF#48 handy, and it covers this subject a bit
The foul spellcasters who achieve this state retain the clarity of their living minds while their souls remain in stasis, allowing eternal rebirth if at any point their physical bodies are destroyed.And
In every known case, this misguided approach has twisted the person to foul outlooks, if the process of getting there didn’t already. Perhaps it is a natural result of divorcing the body from the soul, but those who pass beyond death in this manner invariably
turn to evil as they gradually lose touch with the concerns and feelings of mortals.So yes, the soul is not in the body and not part of the lich
Interesting, I had not seen that. From the first quotation, I must agree you are right - from the view of published Pathfinder material, the soul is in stasis and not affecting the rest of the lich. From the second quotation, I still maintain that the fact that it is not in the body need not in itself change anything, but it also implies that the separation leads to emotional changes.
This is slightly different from what my sidebar says, where there is also a passage saying that neither possession of a soul nor positive versus negative energy is directly connected to alignment, but it wouldn't be the first time that developers were not on the same page... In any case, all the sources seem to intend for liches to eventually "lose touch with concerns for mortals" and the template makes them evil by default. While I might sometimes rule differently in my own games - e.g. that there may be exceptions where a lich retains more emotional functionality - that does not seem to be the official stance. Point conceded.
Yes but the OP is making two huge mistakes. One he was more powerful, not his "minion is ageless and without mortal needs to hinder his power building.Two: He thinks the lich is still the same person he was before hand.
The alchemist could be immortal through his own devices, though, and of high enough level to control the lich magically, particularly with control over its phylactery. It could also be that the changed personality still has some traits making it partial to the alchemist or his aims. Of course, I haven't seen the characters in question, so...
I never said he wouldn't work with him. What I said is it could not be trusted and it would betray him and gain its freedom if it could.
Also look at Undead revisted. It also has some fun stuff if I recall. PF 48 has the run down on some well known lichs. The whispering tyrant, Arazni and Socorro, all get about a half a page and about 2 pages listing other known lichs.
Good read.
Also, this particular lich used to be human before being give a great gift by his master.It does not matter what he was. The human he was is dead. He is not human, lichs are things of alien thought, they are not mortal, they are not human, they are unliving things without souls.
A lich is a human like a demon is a human. They both could have been one, but it has little bearing on what they now are. Look at the Harlot queen, do you honestly think she is the same being as Arazni? They share the same form, the same former life and same memories but they are not the same creature.
My thoughts exactly. There may be precedent for a lich in some adventure path somewhere playing nice because some much more powerful being gave her her own realm to rule.
But the greater precedent, by far, over 37 years of the game's existence is that liches are twisted, deceitful, wicked, disloyal, selfish, cunning, very powerful and definitely, definitely out for themselves first and foremost.
That accounts for about 100% of the liches I've ever read about, and after tonight 99% of the ones I've heard of. I don't know who this lady lich mentioned earlier is, but I have a hard time believing that if the chips were down, she'd act any other way than selfishly.
That's my experience, anyway. But in the end, though I cringe at the overpowered brokenness of whatever game this cohort thing might wind up in, it's your group's game, and you should break it in whatever way makes you happiest.
Lich is NOT a monster race.it is an NPC template.
This is both correct and wrong. Its not a race, it is a monster, a soul-less, remorseless, undead thing. It was mortal. The template is how it is handled in game mechanics.
And honestly if your going by the book it takes at lest months, often years or a lifetime to become one. And 120k isn't a small sum to pour into the crafting of just one item, which going by WPL it a huge chunk of your gear till at lest 18 or so level, much less to make for something else.
Note: you do not get a crafting break on this, that's the cost with you crafting.
That accounts for about 100% of the liches I've ever read about, and after tonight 99% of the ones I've heard of. I don't know who this lady lich mentioned earlier is, but I have a hard time believing that if the chips were down, she'd act any other way than selfishly.
If you mean Azarni, shes known as the Harlot queen and is the defacto ruler of Geb. Used to be a demi-god, got killed by the whisper tyrant. Her knightly order pissed off GEb so he made her his undead queen and gave her a nation to rule. Geb pretty much lets her do as she wishes and keep to himself. And it is unlikely she could harm Geb. Not that she might not try, but she has nothing to gain really.
Now both Fr and ravenloft had Good lich-like beings. Fr's are called Arclichs and are very, very rare and not really "true" lichs. Then you have the elven like like buggers in FR and the undead Bard"lich" in raven loft. In all those cases few are by the book lichs
*blink*
Its a warning as anyone who is doing this is handing your GM one free "Please, oh please screw over my pc" card. Your not only asking him to do so, you have rented a billboard and hired sky writers to ask him to do so.
So. Thanks for policing folks trying to design a creative personality. I'm sure everyone appreciates your efforts at keeping us inside of a box.
There is something fundamentally wrong with a GM actively looking for opportunities to screw over his players (even easy to spot ones).
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is something fundamentally wrong with a GM actively looking for opportunities to screw over his players (even easy to spot ones).Its a warning as anyone who is doing this is handing your GM one free "Please, oh please screw over my pc" card. Your not only asking him to do so, you have rented a billboard and hired sky writers to ask him to do so.
So. Thanks for policing folks trying to design a creative personality. I'm sure everyone appreciates your efforts at keeping us inside of a box.
Why, the sound of a whimpering player begging you to stop doing what you're doing is one of the grandest experiences a GM can have.
Followed by the sound of character sheet torn in half.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
There is something fundamentally wrong with a GM actively looking for opportunities to screw over his players (even easy to spot ones).
Hey, you wave your wang at the king and tell him to bite your shiny metal ass and you are a had lad. This is the same thing.
The Gm is in charge of the world, of the flow of the plot and making the world a living thing for the players. There is something fundamentally wrong with a player who thinks they can do whatever they like and never have anything negative happen to them for actions they take.