| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, it's good that I read this thread completely, otherwise I would probably post the same stuff Captain Yesterday and Nobodody's Home have already said.
Just one note to AsterITA, you are taking all this criticism very well, which is a good thing. Way too many new GM's come asking for advice on the Paizo forum, get criticised for things like what happened here with your campaign by people who have GM'ed for many years (I'm "only" at 13 years of GM'ing, compared to NobodysHome 37 years. Yeesh, way to make a fellow GM feel inexperienced ^^) and then get super-defensive and offended. It speaks very well of you that you can see beyond the criticism to the effective advice.
As I said, I've GM'ed for 13 years and after every campaign I find new things I did wrong and which I can do better for the next campaign. It's a long learning process.
I would have no problem running a game for an Antipaladin of Lamashtu and an Aasimar Paladin.
Lamashtu is bat$#it crazy, but her followers need not be. A sufficiently moderate individual, possessing the mechanical abilities of an Antipaladin (including the much mentioned Code) could bide their time, bite back on their worst impulses and inner desire for tyranny; operate within the framework of both the party and established authorities and further their own and the Mother of Monsters aims. All the while NOT engaging in any kind of PvP nor aberrant behaviour.
Strange bedfellows, allies of convenience, ood couples - these are richly portrayed in myth and fiction reaching back millennia - I have every confidence a group of 20-somethings could see their way beyond the tropes of bad fiction and the hysteria of this thread to make it more than just work, but be memorable. The paladin may be related to the Antipaladin, or be a love interest, or have some caveat that prevents moving against the Antipaladin.
I don't think this thread need focus on PvP as that was not an initial concern of the OP. Nor is PvP the only result of characters with, on the surface, such codified diametric opposition.
@AsterITA - the manuals/books/rules are not necessary for your player to enjoy the game. They will however, educate and inform and add to your players' appreciation and understanding of the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Anyway i already told him to reroll his character with a non-evil one, he will use him in another campaign.
In my experience, being of Evil alignment is not that much a problem. However, being interested in PvP, and actively planning to fight other player/s, is a problem. It's perfectly possible to play a character like Black Tunic Raistlin, and still being nice to the group. Marvel's Punisher code of conduct can be seen as a superhero themed Hellknight, and it's also playable. Focusing on screwing other players is unacceptable, regardless of alignnent. A Neutral ecoterrorist Druid who plans to screw the group when they do something against nature (like fighting a Dire Bear) is unnaceptable, evento if true Neutral. A LG paladin which plans to attack the party rogue if they do rogue stuff, is unnaceptable.
The key here is "don't be a jerk to the rest of players". Beyond alignment, that player plan was to be a jerk.
That said, CE antipaladins ARE jerks, that's their Code. I don't see how they can be played in most AP, unless your handwaive their nature. LE variants are much more interesting.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I would have no problem running a game for an Antipaladin of Lamashtu and an Aasimar Paladin.
Then you are playing homebrewn rules. The two classes cannot co-exist with each other. Hell, Anti-Paladins actually can't coexist with anyone.
I don't think this thread need focus on PvP as that was not an initial concern of the OP.
Uh, er...
I came with an idea, maybe i could tell him that Lamashtu himself told him in a dream to come to Sandpoint and join in a group of "mighty adventurers" in order to find one of his worshippers (Nualia) and help her in her quest. He won't know who is the one that he's looking for, Nualia will ask him herself something similar to "And you, would you stop being like a dog for them and show your very self?!" in order to let him join her in the fight against the others.
I don't think he would have a chance to win the fight and, if he loses, he'll get killed or sent to Magnimar for a trial, in any case he'll need to do another hero.
In my mind, that's suggesting, in the original post, that this character concept is planned with PvP in mind...
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Well, it's good that I read this thread completely, otherwise I would probably post the same stuff Captain Yesterday and Nobodody's Home have already said.
Just one note to AsterITA, you are taking all this criticism very well, which is a good thing. Way too many new GM's come asking for advice on the Paizo forum, get criticised for things like what happened here with your campaign by people who have GM'ed for many years (I'm "only" at 13 years of GM'ing, compared to NobodysHome 37 years. Yeesh, way to make a fellow GM feel inexperienced ^^) and then get super-defensive and offended. It speaks very well of you that you can see beyond the criticism to the effective advice.
As I said, I've GM'ed for 13 years and after every campaign I find new things I did wrong and which I can do better for the next campaign. It's a long learning process.
Well, I didn't become a *competent* GM until 2011, so you have me beat by miles in that department! :-P
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm still waiting for the judge to rule me competent, tell me to calm down will he:-p
Edit: sorry had to, it was the perfect set-up:-p
seriously tho, i've only been GMing pathfinder 5+ years (didn't even GM 3rd edition, tagged along my brother's campaign, was an only occasional player as i got my feet wet again after 17 years away) so i don't know if i'd call myself "competent" but i try to keep it moving and make sure everyone has fun:-p
Of course, no one picking Paladins and Antipaladins makes it a heck of a lot easier:-p
Well, I got complimented by one of my players a few weeks ago, to the tune of being able to provide fun campaigns, so maybe I am still riding high on that sentiment. ;)
I would have no problem running a game for an Antipaladin of Lamashtu and an Aasimar Paladin.
Lamashtu is bat$#it crazy, but her followers need not be. A sufficiently moderate individual, possessing the mechanical abilities of an Antipaladin (including the much mentioned Code) could bide their time, bite back on their worst impulses and inner desire for tyranny; operate within the framework of both the party and established authorities and further their own and the Mother of Monsters aims. All the while NOT engaging in any kind of PvP nor aberrant behaviour.
Strange bedfellows, allies of convenience, ood couples - these are richly portrayed in myth and fiction reaching back millennia - I have every confidence a group of 20-somethings could see their way beyond the tropes of bad fiction and the hysteria of this thread to make it more than just work, but be memorable. The paladin may be related to the Antipaladin, or be a love interest, or have some caveat that prevents moving against the Antipaladin.
I don't think this thread need focus on PvP as that was not an initial concern of the OP. Nor is PvP the only result of characters with, on the surface, such codified diametric opposition.
@AsterITA - the manuals/books/rules are not necessary for your player to enjoy the game. They will however, educate and inform and add to your players' appreciation and understanding of the game.
The only problem I see with this, a character doing this would require much foresight and planning. Which is not one of CE alignment is known for. Granted some GM's don't require pc's to play alignment.
I would have no problem running a game for an Antipaladin of Lamashtu and an Aasimar Paladin.Then you are playing homebrewn rules. The two classes cannot co-exist with each other. Hell, Anti-Paladins actually can't coexist with anyone.
Thats not true, they can coexist with other people who follow their ideals. However, outside of the scope of an evil campaign, it's unlikely they can coexist with a "normal" group of heroic individuals, that's true. And for sure, not with a paladin
Thats not true, they can coexist with other people who follow their ideals. However, outside of the scope of an evil campaign, it's unlikely they can coexist with a "normal" group of heroic individuals, that's true. And for sure, not with a paladinI would have no problem running a game for an Antipaladin of Lamashtu and an Aasimar Paladin.Then you are playing homebrewn rules. The two classes cannot co-exist with each other. Hell, Anti-Paladins actually can't coexist with anyone.
The main problem is the "betray at soonest opportunity" clause to their code.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Anti-paladins are the poster child for "Doesn't work well with others." Evil parties should have have no more interest in an antipaladin than any other. The question isn't if or even when the anti-paladin is going to betray you, it's "if you're still breathing, what horrible fate is he planning to unleash on you? And how much longer do you have to live?"
Anti-paladins should actually be less frequent in evil parties since evil parties will be more likely to simply kill him instead of putting up with his crap.
|
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Well, I got complimented by one of my players a few weeks ago, to the tune of being able to provide fun campaigns, so maybe I am still riding high on that sentiment. ;)
Feels good, don't it? :)
And yeah, concurring that there is serious trouble brewing here and not just with the anti-paladin character concept. Going in looking to cause PvP and party strife is one of the quickest ways to kill a game. Possibly even to break up groups.
Even if the anti-paladin is soundly defeated with no PC/invested-NPC deaths, there are going to be serious trust issues going forward.
I know I certainly had no fun when I was trying to play a heroic character in a supposedly heroic campaign while feeling like I had to constantly look over my shoulder because of other players.
/facepalmWow, that's what I get for not reading carefully. Apologies, Lorax!
=P Quite alright - I like chewing on my own shoes myself.
Now, as far as a theoretical antipaladin goes, that antipaladin code is actually laughable. Its clearly written in a way to discourage actual use by a player. To consistently behave in a manner so described would describe a character with a 8's or worse in all three mental stats.
In order to further the aims of your deity, you first need to survive.
Economy of action math has shown time and again, that one lone badass doesn't survive against a group.
Just because you're EVIL, doesn't mean that you are completely bereft of common sense, just common decency.
I've run D&D without alignments in the past - in 1st Ed. I'd actually be tempted to do it again but I'd rather not use my time unraveling all the mechanical concerns that would cause.
Who says a character class has to be used by a player? The antipaladin exists so that a GM can have an antagonist designed to counter the Paladin. I mean, take the prestige class for the Red Mantis Assassin. There is no valid reason why a GM would allow someone to run one of these. But it still exists so that GMs can provide antagonists who are Red Mantis Assassins.
The same holds true for the antipaladin.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
True, it doesn't have to be played by a player.
Instead you can go to the terrible fortress of the antipaladin.
The fields of his lands lie fallow, the walls of his castle are empty and not patrolled. He sits alone in a dark room with a poorly cooked birthday cupcake singing happy birthday to himself.
Played by a player or used as an NPC the code is still a sentence to be executed before he reaches 3rd level. Even his own church won't help him out of a jam because of the monumental jerk he is and how blatant his behavior is.
There's some LE antipaladin in Way of the Wicked evil campaign (which I think was designed by someone within paizo staff), which is totally playable
I don't think this thread need focus on PvP as that was not an initial concern of the OP.Uh, er...
I came with an idea, maybe i could tell him that Lamashtu himself told him in a dream to come to Sandpoint and join in a group of "mighty adventurers" in order to find one of his worshippers (Nualia) and help her in her quest. He won't know who is the one that he's looking for, Nualia will ask him herself something similar to "And you, would you stop being like a dog for them and show your very self?!" in order to let him join her in the fight against the others.
I don't think he would have a chance to win the fight and, if he loses, he'll get killed or sent to Magnimar for a trial, in any case he'll need to do another hero.In my mind, that's suggesting, in the original post, that this character concept is planned with PvP in mind...
Reading the OP's quote seems to indicate it is the GM who is trying to push the player into choosing a side, with possible PvP - I don't see anywhere in there that the character in question wishes to pursue PvP in and of itself or be problematic.
Antipaladins cant be LE
couldnt have been a Paizo person
Antipaladins cant be LE
couldnt have been a Paizo person
Hence that's why it's a "variant".
I went to my copy to check, it was Jason Buhlman the one who colaborated with the AP, building several LE archetypes for evil characters of Asmodeus, including a Monk, a Cleric, and Antipaladin.
this is the archetype.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Who says a character class has to be used by a player? The antipaladin exists so that a GM can have an antagonist designed to counter the Paladin. I mean, take the prestige class for the Red Mantis Assassin. There is no valid reason why a GM would allow someone to run one of these. But it still exists so that GMs can provide antagonists who are Red Mantis Assassins.
The same holds true for the antipaladin.
Yeah, the Skald for example has "NPC class" written all over itself. ^^
True, it doesn't have to be played by a player.
Instead you can go to the terrible fortress of the antipaladin.
The fields of his lands lie fallow, the walls of his castle are empty and not patrolled. He sits alone in a dark room with a poorly cooked birthday cupcake singing happy birthday to himself.Played by a player or used as an NPC the code is still a sentence to be executed before he reaches 3rd level. Even his own church won't help him out of a jam because of the monumental jerk he is and how blatant his behavior is.
Except his "church" is filled to the brim with monumental jerks. It's a characteristic they find the most desirable in members. If we're following the OP's line - antipaladin of Lamashtu - this is a group of people who actively pursue perversion and depravity. Their standards for acceptable behavior differ pretty dramatically from everyone else.
The word "church" is itself a misnomer here, implying as it does organization, hierarchy and structure. These jerks are CE - such things are not in their nature (Homey don't play that.) These folks are loners, losers and lunatics - they don't congregate in a service, at least not one we would recognize.
If you actually worship a CE deity, the anitpaladin's code represents exemplary behavior and if you don't like it, you better keep your mouth shut or expect gratuitous levels of suffering (details left as an exercise for the interested reader.)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's pretty much a fundamental rule for which I've never seen an exception: The player who wants to screw over the other players is the one most offended and most likely to quit the game if he himself gets screwed over.
Another reason my sympathy for such players is actively negative. (They complain, they get booted. Period.)
NobodysHome: I've been GMing a mere 33 years (almost as long as you have), and I am with you 100% on this!
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
NobodysHome: I've been GMing a mere 33 years (almost as long as you have), and I am with you 100% on this!It's pretty much a fundamental rule for which I've never seen an exception: The player who wants to screw over the other players is the one most offended and most likely to quit the game if he himself gets screwed over.
Another reason my sympathy for such players is actively negative. (They complain, they get booted. Period.)
Oh, gods, Haladir! I'm older than even *you*?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
NobodysHome: I've been GMing a mere 33 years (almost as long as you have), and I am with you 100% on this!It's pretty much a fundamental rule for which I've never seen an exception: The player who wants to screw over the other players is the one most offended and most likely to quit the game if he himself gets screwed over.
Another reason my sympathy for such players is actively negative. (They complain, they get booted. Period.)
Oh, gods, Haladir! I'm older than even *you*?
Its his Avatar, Ezren makes everyone seem older:-p
also i fixed that for you:-)
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Nothing wrong with putting the ancient in old school.
"Hey, you lousy kids get off my lawn! That's not how you run a paladin! Who taught you uppity whippersnappers how to play?"
<trundles off distractedly, mumbling about stupid critical hit tables>
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I remember when Myrmidon wasnt an archetype, it was a 6th lvl fighter:-p
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eW5_ZUFaKEw
If I was starting a campaign, and someone even suggested the possibility of jokingly bringing up the concept of writing up a fan-fiction in which someone wanted to write a screenplay about two people who did an off-Broadway mime act involving an Aasimar Paladin and an Antipaladin of Lamashtu being in the same party...
I'd break out the captain's daughter...
That said, it is entirely possible at some point in some campaigns, to have these sorts of characters working together toward a common goal.
But Burned Offerings is NOT one of those times, and Rise of the Runelords is arguably NOT that campaign.
It is possible, but not here.