Antipaladin.. Kill the rest of the party... Start over reminding the rest of the players not to badger u or this is what happens..
Or make another toon...
Or nerd rage and punch someone in the face...
Leadership feat.
Have your current PC retire after "training" your top Cohort, and pass the the sword.
Let the cohort become your new PC.
I love this idea! (Making a note for future reference.)
So basically the OP is playing an over powered race against it's normal fluff, and is upset that the other players are reminding her that she needs to maintain Lawful Good status to keep her Paladin abilities?
The horror?
Justin Bieber didn't burn down my house and sell my family into slavery, but I reserve the right not want to see, or hear him, or variations of him.I don't care, since the people mocking the "Syndrome" are usually unfunny "human only or you're doing it wrong" jerks anyway.
Some people like that talk about Drizz't as if he had gone and killed their pets, burned their house down and sold their family to slavery.
if only this form allowed sigs, you'd be in one.
|
EK sorcerer is bad. The reason you usually use sorcerer for a paladin EK is that you want to keep divine grace. In this case, your gonna lose that ability and since intelligence is just as high as charisma, wizard based makes more sense for faster spell access. You only lose out a feat vs. the normal fighter entry req...or rage for barbarian which you can't really use or a favored enemy for ranger when you fall. If you really want one of the sorcerer bloodline ability...like ignore crit chance or the + to str or con, you can get it with feats.
Well, I don't know if the OP is still around, but here's my 2 copper, for what it's worth:
1) Like DeathQuaker said... You're fellow players sound like a bunch of immature, misogynistic, punks. They probably have more gaming experience than you, and think they know everything about what "proper gaming" is, and can't handle a fresh perspective on things. It really doesn't matter what the reason is, they need to take hold of their dice bags and shove them up their collective.... ahem. Right. And they need to give you a chance to try things your way.
2) If you like the Paladin idea, then the problem goes back to #1 -- your fellow players. To Hell with them! Your character represents all that is good and just in these civilized lands. As a general rule, the authorities in most cities will look favorably upon you for your purity and devotion. Use that. Less pure and righteous characters are likely to act outside of the law. And players like those you describe are likely to manipulate whatever they can to their advantage, and probably break the law on occasion. Make them pay for their crimes.
3) As others said. Good does not equal nice. Just because it may be nicer to turn the other cheek when someone insults you or makes fun of you, doesn't mean you have to take it. I'm not saying to kill them if they rub you wrong, but you don't have to be nice. What happens if one combat your "roll a bad initiative" (on purpose, of course... "Oops!"). The other "heroes" rush into combat, and when you're initiative comes around... "Dang, I'm thirsty. I spend my move action digging through my backpack, and then a standard action drinking from my waterskin." Come up with similar delays like this for a few rounds, slowly making your way towards the battle. When someone finally cries foul (likely in the form of a "WTF!?"), you say something to the effect of "Hmmm... Maybe if you were a little nicer to me, kept your nose out of my business, and stopped telling me what to do... well maybe, just MAYBE, I'd be more inclined to rush in and help you. Now, what do you say?" And if they don't say "Sorry", tell the GM "I pull out my whetstone and start sharpening my sword." Eventually they'll get the hint. Don't let them die, of course... that would be an act of evil. But you can make them blow all their resources on trying to stay alive! And then refuse to Lay on Hands until they apologize to you, attend a few services at your local church, and atone to your god for insulting their holy champion. This is how you teach them humility. Be sure to have your character spend extra time in prayer each night, apologizing to your deity for having to go to such distasteful measures.
Just a few thoughts.
Antipaladin.. Kill the rest of the party... Start over reminding the rest of the players not to badger u or this is what happens..
Or make another toon...
Or nerd rage and punch someone in the face...
I'd advise against punching people over an imaginary character in a game of make believe. I had a player punch me in the face after I (the GM) had killed his player. The night ended with him powerbombed through my table and a night at the hospital for him. It was a nice table too :(
That's pretty much the only advice I can give that no one else has.
|
|
Antipaladin.. Kill the rest of the party... Start over reminding the rest of the players not to badger u or this is what happens..
Or make another toon...
Or nerd rage and punch someone in the face...
I'd advise against punching people over an imaginary character in a game of make believe. I had a player punch me in the face after I (the GM) had killed his player. The night ended with him powerbombed through my table and a night at the hospital for him. It was a nice table too :(
That's pretty much the only advice I can give that no one else has.
I have never had that kind of violence at any of my games.
I did try to push a former fellow player off a cliff. Though, most of everyone else who know him thought about doing the same, at some point in time.
Leadership feat.
Have your current PC retire after "training" your top Cohort, and pass the the sword.
Let the cohort become your new PC.
The OP is level 1 (level 2 by XP) and is on the Slow experience track. Waiting until Level 7, when Leadership becomes available, is probably not an efficient option.
... The issue is that most people don't live their lives by a strict code. They go with what generally feels right. Paladins operate by strict rules. Even if something feels wrong, they do it anyway...
I'm not sure I would agree with that last sentence, but we'll let it slide.
The problem is the code is vague and open to interpretation. I don't think I have ever seen any 2 people really agree on how the code should be implemented in specific problem situations.
Every time I have had a paladin in the group, probabaly a third to a half of the gaming sessions have ground to a halt while other players and/or the GM argue about what the paladin should do. Not the player thinking the code is breakable or situational. But about how it applies in that given situation.
I would like to play a paladin, because I think it would be amusing to play the holier than thou holy warrior. But I won't because all the continuous arguments drive me nuts. I am going to play an inquisitor with exactly the same code of behavior. I will run it as I interpret that code. I bet I won't get a single argument over any of my actions or motivations.
Well, I don't know if the OP is still around, but here's my 2 copper, for what it's worth:
1) Like DeathQuaker said... You're fellow players sound like a bunch of immature, misogynistic, punks. They probably have more gaming experience than you, and think they know everything about what "proper gaming" is, and can't handle a fresh perspective on things. It really doesn't matter what the reason is, they need to take hold of their dice bags and shove them up their collective.... ahem. Right. And they need to give you a chance to try things your way.
2) If you like the Paladin idea, then the problem goes back to #1 -- your fellow players. To Hell with them! Your character represents all that is good and just in these civilized lands. As a general rule, the authorities in most cities will look favorably upon you for your purity and devotion. Use that. Less pure and righteous characters are likely to act outside of the law. And players like those you describe are likely to manipulate whatever they can to their advantage, and probably break the law on occasion. Make them pay for their crimes.
3)As others said. Good does not equal nice. Just because it may be nicer to turn the other cheek when someone insults you or makes fun of you, doesn't mean you have to take it. I'm not saying to kill them if they rub you wrong, but you don't have to be nice. What happens if one combat your "roll a bad initiative" (on purpose, of course... "Oops!"). The other "heroes" rush into combat, and when you're initiative comes around... "Dang, I'm thirsty. I spend my move action digging through my backpack, and then a standard action drinking from my waterskin." Come up with similar delays like this for a few rounds, slowly making your way towards the battle. When someone finally cries foul (likely in the form of a "WTF!?"), you say something to the effect of "Hmmm... Maybe if you were a little nicer to me, kept your nose out of my business, and stopped telling me what to do... well maybe, just MAYBE, I'd be more inclined to rush in and help you. Now, what do you say?" And if they don't say "Sorry", tell the GM "I pull out my whetstone and start sharpening my sword." Eventually they'll get the hint. Don't let them die, of course... that would be an act of evil. But you can make them blow all their resources on trying to stay alive! And then refuse to Lay on Hands until they apologize to you, attend a few services at your local church, and atone to your god for insulting their holy champion. This is how you teach them humility. Be sure to have your character spend extra time in prayer each night, apologizing to your deity for having to go to such distasteful measures.
WHOAH.
Your advice violates a cardinal guideline to good roleplaying: OOC =/= IC
If the problem is the players, then you deal with the players -- out of character, by talking to them, like a sensible and reasonable adult. Or leaving the group if a resolution cannot be found.
"Punishing" PCs, cheating, and taking it out on the PCs because of OOC behavior is passive aggressive in the worst kind of way. You will not teach anyone a lesson by harboring a competitive atmosphere in character, you will just derail the game into PVP nonsense while the real issues causing the resentment either never get addressed, or get addressed only after everyone is pissed off, guaranteeing a civil resolution will be extremely difficult to achieve. Most likely, the game will end up imploding as everyone builds up resentment toward each other. Even in the best case scenario where some success is garnered, it makes people think PC animosity is a good thing to engender in what is supposed to be a cooperative game. That is not what I call a good resolution.
Right now, based on what we know, the other players do not resent Natural 22. They're being disrespectful, but they don't resent her. That is a good thing that she needs to keep on her side. She's got the moral high ground and there's absolutely no reason she should give it up in the name of petty, childish tactics that will in the end help neither her have fun playing the game nor encourage the others to play like decent human beings.
On another note, Natural 22 hasn't posted again in awhile. I hope we didn't scare her off.
... IMO, the vagueness should be in the players discretion ...
I got no problem with that. Unfortunately I never see that actually happen. Even in a group that agrees to do that ahead of time.
But it seems like almost every time there is a "What?!? Paladins can't do..." or "You're a paladin, don't you have to..."
It gets really tiresome.
... IMO, the vagueness should be in the players discretion ...I got no problem with that. Unfortunately I never see that actually happen. Even in a group that agrees to do that ahead of time.
But it seems like almost every time there is a "What?!? Paladins can't do..." or "You're a paladin, don't you have to..."
It gets really tiresome.
For players who do that, I suggest
1) Patiently explaining that when they play a paladin, they can play them however they like, and that they are being disrespectful telling you how to play their character.
2) Failing that, hitting them on the head repeatedly with the core rulebook until they can no longer speak coherently. Ever.
... IMO, the vagueness should be in the players discretion ...I got no problem with that. Unfortunately I never see that actually happen. Even in a group that agrees to do that ahead of time.
But it seems like almost every time there is a "What?!? Paladins can't do..." or "You're a paladin, don't you have to..."
It gets really tiresome.
For players who do that, I suggest
1) Patiently explaining that when they play a paladin, they can play them however they like, and that they are being disrespectful telling you how to play their character.
2) Failing that, hitting them on the head repeatedly with the core rulebook until they can no longer speak coherently. Ever.
Actually the worst time, I was the GM. I had no significant problem with what the paladin was doing. It was maybe a bit of sophistry. But it was consistent with how that player had been interpreting his mission and diety's goals all along.
All 4 of the other players got into an argument about it and refused to let it die. Even after I pulled the GM card and said I was letting it go with no penalty, they still wouldn't stop. I tried, the arguing has attracted the attention of bandits who have surprised you while you are not paying attention. The kept arguing while the bandit encounter was being resolved. I eventually called it a night and said we would pick up in 2 weeks even though we normally didn't stop for another hour and a half. Apparently the argument continued for days by text messages without involving me or the player of the paladin.Next session I said arguments like that were likely to make me not want to complete the campaign since it was no longer a relaxing pleasant pastime. They weren't as bad after that, but it never really stopped.
I was getting close to using your option 2 above.