How to handle the party hating my character for being at odds with the party and the council?


Advice

Silver Crusade

A problem with my character is that the party doesn't trust him at all.

My character, a cavalier, was hired by the council (made up of noble men and women across the kingdom) from the last 7 years to go out and find the heir of the throne. After 7 years of looking at the west part of the kingdom he was not able to find anything. So he headed back to the council to report this, while he was their he was told by the council that he would also be sent to retrieve the 10 pieces of the heart. While doing so he stumbled upon a group of pc's which were also looking for the heart for the reward and glory.

While within the party I was sending messages to the council about how many pieces of the heart we had and where we were going next. (without the parties knowledge.) After about two weeks of traveling suddenly a group of masked men (were their to protect the king, but vanished after his death), came up to the party and told them that they were sent by the council to retrieve the heart from us. While they were talking to us we got into a fight with them. While a party member was searching one of their bodies he found a letter which contained my name, and was just thanking me about telling them the information.

The masked men were actually a rebel group. After finding the letter the party immediately started to question and doubt me (i told them the truth about what my mission was and my goals). After doing so the party immediately started to suspect me, never letting me out of their sight. A few days had gone by and we were approached by a group of assassins which were supposedly sent by the council to kill us. But this was not true as my character later found out in a town where he was approached by a masked figure (with the council's seal and he was a known figure to me). To whom i told everything that had happened.

If i continue to this i might be put into a conflict with the party, or be put in a conflict with the council in which i would be put to death. Im not sure if i should continue to spy on the party for the council which would eventually end up making the party my enemy (as i would have to take the heart from them at the end, to give to the council).

The party is very untrustworthy of the council at the moment and thinks that they are evil. While i believe that they are not as i have been with them for a number of years

This is also my first pathfinder game and I don't know what to do. How can I handle being in a party where my character is at odds with everyone else?


Im sorry what are "the council", the "hearts", and the "stones"?

edit: like is "the council" a criminal organization, or like a council of elders/nobelmen that are ruling a kingdom while searching for this lost heir?

and are the hearts and stones some king of magic item/artifact?

Shadow Lodge

I would not put anyone in that position in their first Pathfinder game. Did you discuss this backstory with the GM before starting play? Did you know that the party you were joining was going to be at odds with the council?

I would talk with your GM about your concerns. Together you should be able to determine a course of action that you are comfortable with. For example, you could talk to the party about how your family could be executed if you do not cooperate with the council and ask for their help. The party could then use your character as a double agent, getting you back in the council's graces somehow without actually giving the council anything the party doesn't want them to have.

If the GM dismisses your concerns then you should consider trying to find a new group, because this one probably will not give you the best introduction to the game.

EDIT: From your second post it looks like a good solution might be to see if you can get some assistance from the council in proving to the party that they are not, in fact, evil. The GM and other players should hopefully be cooperative if you explain to them out of character that you aren't enjoying being at odds with the rest of the party. Otherwise, see above about maybe finding a different group.

Silver Crusade

I discussed the backstory with him, and he told that he thinks i can handle it. But i just ended up confusing me. Before the game I didn't know anyone that was going to be in the party or their characters.

Sovereign Court

Generaly the party members have a solid concept over them, for example:
- The partys bard is usually a silly guy who wants everybody hear him and claim his skills.
- The Fighter is a big guy who only seeks getting as much gold as he can.
- The paladin will face any bad guy he found and send them to hell.
So, knowing this just found a way to get them like you. Pay for the fighters new brillant sword and he will forgive everithing, pray to the cleric/paladin deity and offer he/she something. Your partner will love you.
-Celebrate your bard new masterpice and he will be glad someone rocognice his talents
- Feed yours druid pet, save a wounded animal or something like that and he will trust you.

You catch the idea?
If you dont know what to do with x class just tell me what they are and ill help you with that.


Sounds like the beginning of a good story to me.
I would discuss it out of character with your DM and the rest of the players.

Shadow Lodge

Have you talked to him since then about how you're confused and uncomfortable with how this is playing out?

When he says he thinks you can handle it, do you know why? Are you friends outside the game?

I agree that it does sound like a good story, but it's throwing you in the deep end as far as roleplaying goes.

Sovereign Court

You can play a dual sided character, it will be fun i think.
Just be with your party and lie to the counsil as long as you can... When the counsil discovers it (most likely when the gm thinks is a good moment to start fighting them) just stay with your new party members.
You can rol that you like the freedom style of your new life or something like that.
Remember this, good gms tend to have reasons to do things their way. He has a plan for you and seems to be big, just relax and play nothing bad will hapen.

Silver Crusade

My gm is loving what I'm doing as I'm basically adding new things to the story, and making it more adventures for everyone else. The players also love this but can't show it in their pcs as they don't trust me at all (thats the part I'm worried about, as well as the council). I was just discussing with my dm about being a double agent and thinks that it would be fun. It would also help drive the story more (his words).


Why would your party-mates--people that you work and travel with every day, people who trust that you will have their back in life and death situations including combat--believe a bunch of masked men who attempted to rob them over you? I know I wouldn't believe any bad things some mugger told me about my co-workers, especially if my co-workers were right there helping me not get mugged!

This sounds like a case of characters making decisions based on player information. Sure the players know the masked men are telling the truth but their characters don't and they should, IMHO, trust your word over the random brigands' unless you've given them some in-game, in-character reason not to. If there is no reason like this, gently remind them that it's very difficult to separate player knowledge from character knowledge so they're not people or even bad players, but they should try to ensure that they are making decisions for the right reasons using the appropriate information.

Shadow Lodge

arash009 wrote:
My gm is loving what I'm doing as I'm basically adding new things to the story, and making it more adventures for everyone else. The players also love this but can't show it in their pcs as they don't trust me at all (thats the part I'm worried about, as well as the council). I was just discussing with my dm about being a double agent and thinks that it would be fun. It would also help drive the story more (his words).

That's great that they're loving it.

But it doesn't sound like you're loving it, or you wouldn't have posted this topic.

Why not?

Are you worried about bad things happening to your character? Worried about messing it up for the other players? Not doing it "right"? Are you overwhelmed by having to keep track of all this intrigue? Do you feel like you're not in control of your character?

Silver Crusade

Im worried that i might ruin the game for everyone else if i don't play my part right, or that I would end up digging a grave for the party.

Sovereign Court

that makes sense born of fire

Liberty's Edge

This doesn't sounds like something that would be your problem. Either the GM is giving you a chance to roleplay a morally questionable character, or a character in a morale quandary. So you get to decide who to side with, either the people you've been fighting with, who've had your back as you've had theirs, or to side with the council, who, despite your party's misgivings, you feel have the people's best interests in mind.

Or the GM's specifically trying to have the party work against each other. Either way, I can't see how this would be your fault for ruining the game.

Shadow Lodge

arash009 wrote:
Im worried that i might ruin the game for everyone else if i don't play my part right, or that I would end up digging a grave for the party.

That is not something I would worry about.

From what you've said, the GM and the other players have all asked you to play this role because they think it will make a more interesting story. So either they trust the GM to make sure that you don't destroy the party, or they don't care if you destroy the party so long as it's an interesting story. Maybe both.

Some of my friends are like that. It can feel a little weird if you see getting a "good" ending as part of the goal of the game (I do) but you can't ruin the game for these kinds of players just by digging a grave for their characters, and as long as you honestly engage with your role, you're doing it right.


The party is being unfair to your character: you tell them you are an agent of The Council. They suspect you of being really with the Rebels, but they don't like the Council, anyway! They need to make up their minds.

arash009 wrote:
I was sending messages to the council about how many pieces of the heart we had and where we were going next. (without the parties knowledge.)

The letters you write home are your business, usually. It does seem you were indiscreet about how you were communicating, so when the letter was intercepted, it jeopardized the security of the mission. Bad on you, but live and learn, and there might not have been anything you could have done anyway, at least not after a point. I guess you and the Council never worked out a way of encoding your letters, and it's too late to try that once you are out in the field.

But just because 1 or more of your letters fell into the wrong hands is no reason for the party to distrust you.

arash009 wrote:
If i continue to this i might be put into a conflict with the party, or be put in a conflict with the council in which i would be put to death. Im not sure if i should continue to spy on the party for the council which would eventually end up making the party my enemy (as i would have to take the heart from them at the end, to give to the council).

Let it play out.

Weirdo wrote:
So either they trust the GM to make sure that you don't destroy the party, or they don't care if you destroy the party so long as it's an interesting story. Maybe both.

Because, yes, that.

arash009 wrote:
While doing so he stumbled upon a group of pc's which were also looking for the heart for the reward and glory.

It doesn't seem like you have to be a cross purposes. Why can't the other PCs find reward and glory with the Council? Can you advocate for them in your letters to secure reward and prestige for them as well, or share your reward money with them? If the party doesn't get any extra reward for helping you complete the Council's mission, might they not still gain glory which will lead to other good opportunities?

arash009 wrote:
The party... the council... thinks that they are evil.

Why doesn't the party trust the council?


Quote:


A problem with my character is that the party doesn't trust him at all.

***your PC has long term outstanding loyalties to an outside organization that probably trumps any feelings of camaraderie towards the party***

***your PC was spying on the party***

***the party finds out you were spying on them after an attempt is made on their life. Your PC claims that the group you are spying for is *not* the group that attacked them, despite evidence to the contrary***

***another attempt is made on your life, and evidence points towards the same group you are spying for being responsible***

***the only evidence you have of your group not being responsible is one of your "handlers" claiming otherwise***

Lets be clear.

Your party shouldn't trust you. You are working for an organization that appears to be hostile towards them, and you have divided loyalties. Viewing your motives as suspect is totally reasonable.

Now, as for solutions, here's what I suggest:

Declare that you have no clue what is going on beyond what you have already told them, and what you have said so far has been completely truthful. Permit truth spells and mind reading spells to be used on you as you say this and answer further questioning. Detect Thoughts and Touch of Truthtelling are both reasonable to have unless your party is really low level, and there isn't an easy way of getting around both of them barring specific class features. Beg for them, in fact. It helps when the universe asserts that you are not lying and the window into your mind shows nothing that conflicts with your words. Say that the actions taken against the party do not match up with the council's modus operandi as you have seen it, and that you do not believe that the council is actually responsible. Swear that you will only send information to the council with their permission and let the party see any reports you do send back. Assure them that if the council is responsible, then you are not going to side with the council and bring harm to them. Promise them that you are only going to turn the heart over to the council if the rest of the party is going to be properly rewarded for their substantial efforts.

If you aren't willing to say the above, then we go straight back to "you aren't to be trusted". It's harsh, but based on the evidence your party has, it is reasonable.

You should probably also have a chat with the GM about what he has in mind for you. By the looks of things, you have been unwittingly set up as a GM plant. It's not a particularly nice thing to do to any player or the rest of the party without their permission, especially when the unwitting plant is a new player. Tell him that you are worried that this whole thing is going to hurt the game, and see what his response is. Hopefully something good will come of it (it probably won't harm, at the very least).

Hope this helps, and for what it's worth, I don't think the whole mess is your fault. Your GM has basically set this up to happen. Your PC is just the means.


What's the allignement of this character?
If the character is Lawfull, your loyalty be with the council so just continue to do what you are doing.
If the character is chaotic, screw the council. Staying alive is more important, and having a party to help you kill the bandits is mighty usefull. If the council comeback for you, just say you were charmed by the party wizard and bluff you ass off.


born_of_fire wrote:

Why would your party-mates--people that you work and travel with every day, people who trust that you will have their back in life and death situations including combat--believe a bunch of masked men who attempted to rob them over you? I know I wouldn't believe any bad things some mugger told me about my co-workers, especially if my co-workers were right there helping me not get mugged!

This sounds like a case of characters making decisions based on player information. Sure the players know the masked men are telling the truth but their characters don't and they should, IMHO, trust your word over the random brigands' unless you've given them some in-game, in-character reason not to. If there is no reason like this, gently remind them that it's very difficult to separate player knowledge from character knowledge so they're not people or even bad players, but they should try to ensure that they are making decisions for the right reasons using the appropriate information.

The party is not using out of game knowledge they are using evidence their characters found that the poster is working for someone else. The posters character actually admitted this to the party. Add this to the fact that the posters character is a recent addition to the party and they have every reason to suspect him. In fact if they did not suspect something then they would be using player knowledge. PC don’t have a tattoo on their forehead stating they are a PC. If a PC acts in a suspicious manner the rest of the group should be suspicious.

The character is working for the council of nobles but what is the council like? If it is a good group then all the player needs to do is to convince they party of their intentions. If it is an evil group then the fact that one of the players is a paladin means they are not going to ever trust the council. If it is more neutral then the player needs to find a way to align the interests of the party with that of the council.

Ultimately the player is going to need to decide where his loyalties are, and then act accordingly.


That information was edited into the post. At the time I composed my post, all the OP had said was that they chose to fight the masked men rather than hand over the stones. There was no mention of a letter or any evidence other than what the masked men verbally reported to OP's party-mates.

Incidentally, what was edited into the post to make the situation more clear would certainly qualify as an in-game, in-character reason to be suspicious, which I acknowledged might exist when I told the OP he should only gently remind the players that OOC knowledge should not be used if it did not.


It's fascinating seeing how your players interpret your own campaign. Not to say that you're wrong Arash, but your interpretation of events puts things in a new perspective. I don't think the party hates you as much as you think they do.

The DM's a she, by the way :)


DoctorSix wrote:

It's fascinating seeing how your players interpret your own campaign. Not to say that you're wrong Arash, but your interpretation of events puts things in a new perspective. I don't think the party hates you as much as you think they do.

The DM's a she, by the way :)

Honestly, given the situation that has been set up, its perfectly understandable that the OP suspects the party hates -- or at least strongly distrusts -- the OP's character. This can be even more the case if its a relatively new player (obviously no idea if OP has RPG experience outside of PF). More to the point, the PC in question IS working toward two potentially very different purposes (the council and the party). As such, the OP's PC should be more than a little a paranoid.

It reminds me of a Shadowrun game I played once where I was playing a character whom the party would be very wise not to trust (had not yet come up to the party yet, but suffice to say, the character was not trustworthy). Playing the character was a lot of fun, and he did do things that irritated the party at the times, but I was always having to be careful to make sure that it was the other PCs, and not the other players, that were getting irritated. One of the other players (who would later be the Best Man at my wedding) even admitted that there were times when he was mildly irritated rather than the character. So, I certainly see where the OP is coming from here. The good thing was that we discussed things OOC and made sure that we were good (my character btw, was very much a double agent with the Tir and UCAS and as such tended to reveal very little about himself).

All that said though, it does sound as though the group (players and GM, not PCs) has a pretty good handle on things at the moment. I do say though, that in situations like this its perfectly fair to talk to the group OOC to make sure that everyone is cool with the situation and having fun. Nobody ever wants to be the cause of a lack of fun after all. As for in-game: The detect alignment/detect thoughts/Zone of Truth, etc. ideas are all great ways for the PC in question to show to the party that he can be trusted. Assuming of course that he can be trusted. ;)


1 person marked this as a favorite.

While I'm new to Pathfinder, I'm not necessarily new to RP. When everyone OOC seems to enjoy it, a good group tends to find reasons for the characters to maintain a working relationship. The lack of trust is due to a DM decision (the finding of the note with your name on it) and, most likely, at some point the DM may produce a means to exonerate your character. That's the beauty of RP imo.


Johnggernaut wrote:
While I'm new to Pathfinder, I'm not necessarily new to RP. When everyone OOC seems to enjoy it, a good group tends to find reasons for the characters to maintain a working relationship. The lack of trust is due to a DM decision (the finding of the note with your name on it) and, most likely, at some point the DM may produce a means to exonerate your character. That's the beauty of RP imo.

Excellent point. Following up on that, so long as your character keeps acting in the party's interest, they'll come to trust you more and more. Of course, its up to you and your character to determine how far he goes to act in the party's interest should that interest conflict with those of the council, but that's often part of what makes RPGs so much fun.

In my current PF game, we started out as a group whose only thing in common was that we had all just escaped from slavery at the hands of drow and illithids. My monk had a past that was, checkered at best, and I described his alignment (at game start) as "Lawful Angry" (LN). In his heart, he wanted to be good, but he usually found himself unable to stay on the side of good for very long. As the campaign has progressed though, he has had his moments to make key decisions and eventually everyone at the table was surprised when the cleric of the group was casting detect evil/good in an effort to gauge the intentions of an NPC. The party was surprised when the GM stated my monk detected as "good". My GM doesn't do alignment shifts lightly (which I agree with) but she said that there was plenty of evidence to suggest that my character was good and not just neutral. So in other words, your character's actions will help dictate how he is perceived by the others.


I agree with several of the other posters that the in-game conflict and added plot depth are a good thing. IMHO playing the game for reasons other than amassing a high score (xp or wealth) is far more rewarding and what elevates tabletop rpgs above computer games.

I think you need to have an ooc discussion with the rest of the group to understand what the limits will be or where you can step ooc to explain what you are doing in character to ensure your game doesn't go in a direction that becomes un-fun. Eg PvP combat.

Community / Forums / Pathfinder / Pathfinder First Edition / Advice / How to handle the party hating my character for being at odds with the party and the council? All Messageboards

Want to post a reply? Sign in.
Recent threads in Advice
Druid Gear