|
In the heat of battle, how likely would it be that the barbarian would notice a wizard that he was not engaged with cast a spell? If he is jockeying for position in a melee with an opponent or two, would he really have time to notice some spell caster in the back casting? I don't think so. Also the OP never states from what angle the fighter approached from. Did the dominated ally come from behind? If so it would be very plausible for any character, having just received damage from an unknown attacker to just turn and swing. While PC death at the hands of another player can cause hurt feelings in the group, it can make for some memorable role playing. And who's to say that the killed fighter doesn't have some sibling that hears of the action and comes seeking revenge. This will also allow the fighter player to finally create that build they had been thinking about.
Per the rules of Pathfinder, as long as the wizard didn't have concealment--even if he had still and silent spell--100% likely.
You could have withdrawn in the caster's direction. Why are we just getting these details now by the way? I think you are trying to make excuses TO attack your friend and not enough NOT TO.And then my character would have been charged by the fighter (charges get double movement)and been in the exact same situation with less hp next round.
Sometimes doing the right thing isn't as easy as doing what's expedient. But expedient doesn't mean right.
Sometimes doing the right thing isn't as easy as doing what's expedient. But expedient doesn't mean right.You could have withdrawn in the caster's direction. Why are we just getting these details now by the way? I think you are trying to make excuses TO attack your friend and not enough NOT TO.And then my character would have been charged by the fighter (charges get double movement)and been in the exact same situation with less hp next round.
So the "right thing" in your opinion would have been for the OP to let the dominated fighter kill the barbarian. That doesn't sound quite right to me.
Personally I think the death is just what the player gets for picking a bad class, but the real "right thing" would have been to hit the Fighter for nonlethal damage. Which apparently both the OP and the rest of the table forgot was an option.
I really hope this doesn't devolve into others tossing accusations about how you shouldn't "punish" players who pick bad classes.
And then my character would have been charged by the fighter (charges get double movement)and been in the exact same situation with less hp next round.
Nope. You already said why in your own post, "...the caster was 50ft away and not in a straight line..." When you Withdraw you don't have to move in a straight line. That is a limitation of charge though.
Look, you came here asking for advice on how you should have handled this. The advice was given. If you are going to do nothing but argue and defend the actions that you did do then I don't see this going very constructively and I will happily bow out. I think it is obvious that you know that something you did was wrong or else you wouldn't come here asking for advice, though.
Arachnofiend: You are guilty of this. Bill Dunn did not suggest to "let the dominated fighter kill the barbarian." Otherwise we are in agreement.
Westphalian_Musketeer: We should also hope it doesn't devolve into others tossing accusations about how you should "punish" players who pick bad classes. Wait... too late.
Regarding several people stating the actions of original poster are wrong. I tend to see this as player not character knowledge being taken into account. A combat round is 6 seconds. All this is taking place in six seconds of time. I have never been in this type of combat and probably never will, but I would find it hard for someone to not instinctively react with a counter attack to someone attacking them. Could the player have asked for a check to notice that a spell was being cast and to realize it affected his ally? Sure. Would it be plausible for his character to be able to notice all this going on while fighting off other attackers? Probably not.
I am not entirely familiar with all the Pathfinder rules and do not claim to be, but to me as a player and a GM, I use the rules as a guideline. As a GM I probably would not have quite used this type of tactic or if I did allow. The dominated player would have had a chance to resist using lethal damage to their ally and also allow them to make an attempt to let the barbarian know the attack was coming. As a player, I just can't see a character (not player there is a difference) realizing everything that is going on to make an inform decision to prevent any type of counter attack.
I am however curious as to whether there were actions available to other party members in between the dominated fighter's attack and the barbarian's counter attack that could have resolved the issue in a different way. Is it possible that either GM or party (pro fighter or pro barbarian) was setting this up to occur because there are other group dynamics at play?
Did you actually kill him outright with your last hit? Or were you just able to drop him into the negatives and then kept swinging anyway?
IMO, because metagaming isn't good, your Barbarian had no way to know that his ally had been dominated. For all he knew, this "ally" had turned on him, so in his view he killed a treacherous former ally who had joined the other side.
IMO, a tiny slice of meta-gaming used in an effort to not kill your friends character when you in fact know what is going on is perfectly prudent. Yes, you should have hit him for non-lethal damage.
And c'mon guys, enough with the "I hate fighters, and here's another opportunity to talk $h!! about fighters" type of comments.
Did you actually kill him outright with your last hit? Or were you just able to drop him into the negatives and then kept swinging anyway?I think he had about 10hp before my last hit.
So you did 24+ on a single hit? (assuming a fighter would have at least a 14 CON)
Pretty much? So, maybe not? What level are we talking here. At max greatsword does 12 + 1.5 Str damage. So, rage adds +2 to str mod, or +3 for the greatsword. So thats 15 damage, and power attack is +3 more for 18. Or +6 if you're level 5 for 21. Add in a +2 weapon and you're at 23. I'm thinking the math wasn't done right, and you took a swing which would have dropped the fighter to dying, and then swung agian.
And the party cleric/oracle didn't have breath of life?
Okay, but did the paladin fall?
Depends, did the Wizard catch him in time?
Pretty much? So, maybe not? What level are we talking here. At max greatsword does 12 + 1.5 Str damage. So, rage adds +2 to str mod, or +3 for the greatsword. So thats 15 damage, and power attack is +3 more for 18. Or +6 if you're level 5 for 21. Add in a +2 weapon and you're at 23. I'm thinking the math wasn't done right, and you took a swing which would have dropped the fighter to dying, and then swung agian.
And the party cleric/oracle didn't have breath of life?
Wait. Breath of life is a 5th level spell, and you expect an Oracle to have it.
Yet you're surprised that an 8th level Barbarian (the needed level to cast Breath of Life for an oracle) can reach 24+ damage? At 8th level?Power attack alone adds 9 dmg on a greatsword with a +8 BAB.
And your average Barbarian probably reaches 24 For while raging now adding 10 dmg point/hit with a two-handed weapon.
Add the dmg bonus for a Magical Greatsword, some firendly buffs and you should probably feel sorry if his Barbarian ONLY does 24 dmg/hit.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Count me as another vote for "shit happens, time to make a new character." This is not an uncommon scenario in a game where people can get magically dominated. My group had basically the same situation occur in our last session. My character was dominated by a vampire and was told to attack my party members. The only difference is that my team-mates were able to cast protection from evil to give me another save before I turned on them as instructed. Luckily, I passed the second save otherwise I'd prolly be dead too since they'd have had no choice but to beat me up to stop me from attacking them. I was sweating bullets and planning what to play next because these things happen. Your fighter friend needs to suck it up.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You made a tough choice and it went badly. Nonlethal attacks would have been a good idea, but even than the -4 could have caused you to miss one or more times and resulted in your own death. People need to be able to forgive each other for this kind of choice both in and out of character.
The fighters player was peeved because I killed his player and he had to sit out the rest of the session as no one had prepped a rez spell. The gm was peeved because I had been complaining about how much I disliked mind control spells and he saw my decision as an attempt to stir on the issue. Mainly it was just unfair imo accusations of pvp.
It's unfortunate that this is getting mixed up with your feelings on mind control. I would try to explain to the others why you felt you had no choice given you and apparently the rest of the group forgot about nonlethal damage. Point out that although your choice would have been the same regardless of your feelings on mind control, your dislike results from a desire to avoid this kind of high-stakes PVP. It's unfair to expect that a PC whose life is threatened by a Dominated PC won't retaliate. You might also ask that if others think you were too quick to attack the fighter, they suggest alternate tactics if you are ever in a similar situation again. For example, nonlethal damage, or allowing another character to incapacitate the fighter while you get the Dominator.
Others have suggested ways his character could make up for it, assuming the character realizes what actually happened (which there should be a good reason for his realization if he does): Paying for the resurrection, an in-character heartfelt apology after, and the like.
Good idea.
Why shouldn't they take sense motive? I mean, lawful people can be some of the most insidious liars.Barbarians have every right to put ranks in Sense Motive if they want, and there's nothing wrong with it if they do. However, it's not a class skill and Barbarians are probably the least likely characters to fill a party face or similar role, so I just doubt it's a common choice.
Mine has +16 (level 6). There are quite a few traits that grant Sense Motive as a class skill and Snake Style is handy for an unarmed fighter barbarian since barbarian AC is... lacking. Of course, if your barbarian focuses on UAS they also have an easier time with nonlethal damage than your average barbarian.
Wind chime, if I may, could we approach this like a quiz?
Would your barbarian try to instantly kill anyone that harmed him and threatened his life?
What has he done previously when this has happened (e.g. bandit hits your char for damage)?
Would your barbarian spare an ally that turned upon him?
Would your barbarian ever use full defence, if attacked in melee by an ally?
Has your barbarian ever pursued subduing tactics previously?
Does your barbarian have any knowledge arcana or spellcraft?
What did your barbarian say after, to the rest of the party?
What would your barbarian be thinking after this ordeal?
Would he feel guilt or anger bordering on rage over this?
If the shoe fits, the character was played and the show must go on.