'Forced' to agree with him? Don't put it all on the paladin, even if his character was a dick and certainly not a 'correctly' played paladin. The rest of the party was complicit in it.
The paladin made convincing intimidate checks, and when you first meet eachother's characters, are you more likely to side with the plate armored goliath with a greatsword, or the weedy unassuming rogue when the paladin decides to get all righteous? The paladin forced the division, the other's were pretty meek in real life, so they werent the arguing type.
Funnily, once i switched to the barbarian, we had some pretty amazing sessions that everyone enjoyed.
That doesn't make them any less complicit, and an intimidate check doesn't make them automatically believe him. And when the effects wear off, they're supposed to be pretty pissed off with the guy. Don't suppose they played out that part, did they?
They're just as bad as him.
Yeah, not so much, the GM was solid about it though, and the other party members kept trying to convince the paladin, but the paladin could shout louder than anyone else, so it never made much difference.
Whenever the GM or other players said "SERIOUSLY?" in real life, he just ranted about how he's only playing his character correctly, its a roleplaying game, blah blah blah, and he could shout pretty loud in real life too, everyone including me just rolled our eyes and let him, hence why when i suggested swapping characters to barbarian, the GM jumped on the idea. The problem player was bringing a sour tone to the whole table after all, but DAMN was he imposing and stubborn in real life.
Context: I was actually playing this at a local board-gaming society "thing", I didnt know anyone there at the time of arriving, so it's not like they had much reason to dislike me as a person right from the off. The GM was apologizing for him immediately after the first session, i'm not sure why the paladin player was like that, but as soon as i rolled up a barbarian, he didnt have a problem, whether or not the GM took him to one side and spoke to him i dont know.
Now i'm not saying switching characters will solve the original poster's problem, i was just relating to being in a crappy situation because of how a player chooses to roleplay their characters.
Make up names to call them yourself. Ignore their anger. Reply that communication is key to survival and being arbitrary about even giving a signator to use can only hinder you all.
If one if 'rangery' call him flower boy (or girl).
If one if priestly call him/her holy boy or girl.
Etc.
If they get upset tell them they should not care what you call them since you obviously don't mean anything to them.
Or tell them that your culture does not respect secretive strangers and you have done them the immense honor of telling them YOUR name. They should be grateful to have such and not reciprocating is tantamount to an insult. One that means they do not deserve the benefit of your abilities in combat.
Honestly these characters sound like a bunch of antisocial babies. Let them know that if you have no means of properly addressing them then you have no means to warn them when they are in danger in battle.
Do you know these characters players outside the game? Have you been able to ask them why they are being so rediculous in game? Or why they are breaking their own characters concept by being in an adventuring GROUP to start with?
If they are loners, why are they not alone?
@RaizielDragon
More context: Yes, the rogue was true neutral actually (knife master i think, but i dont still have his character sheet, so im not 100%), he never had time to do anything evil in the 2 mins it took for the paladin to decide a rogue had no place in the party.
It was the standard scene, at the start of the campaign we had responded to a flier asking for help, the GM employer npc said: "I ASSUME, you have become acquainted with one another?"(we hadnt, so we took turns introducing ourselves)
Sorcerer goes first.
Then paladin said something about being a knight of valor and whatnot, (cant remember his god) and how he would cleanse evil from the world, something something something.
Then my turn: "I'm Keris, swiftest blade in the southern slums, there's no lock I can't pick and no problem I can't fix." (good god, looking back that makes him sound like a cowboy... *sigh*)
Now maybe I could've tried to make my character sound less cool (/less like an urban cowboy.), but following the paladin's lengthy monologue to introduce himself I thought i should just say more than his name... mistake. That one sentence was enough to convince the paladin:
That's when the paladin got all righteous, and the druid hadnt even had a chance to introduce himself at this point.
Edit: Ive posted a fair bit of info... now i'm paranoid someone from that group is going to spot this, here's hoping they dont frequent the forums!
If you ever need to have an in character way to know someone's name there are multiple spells to do so, blood biography, questioning with the aid of detect thoughts, discern next of kin and ask their family, charm/dominate person and asking them to tell you, share memory and help yourself to a minute of remembered conversation with someone who does know their name, knowledge local could probably get you it too, maybe even knowledge nobility if they come from a noble background. Other options include killing them and casting speak with dead, torturing them and threatening them, however those are likely not going to improve the situation (well apart from killing them if you can get away with it, although I'd probably spend any time with the body damaging it to the point raise dead won't work instead of asking questions).
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
This seems like a clear-cut case of someone being "lawful stupid".
I disagree. I think this is a case of "looking at the character sheet and metagaming with that information". Many people see the class name "Rogue" and think that's all they need to know - the character must be a backstabbing thief and at least borderline evil. Apart from the fact that the Rogue makes a rather bad rogue character, this pure player knowledge (even if he only deductes the class from bits and pieces of information), i.e. pure metagaming. "swiftest blade in the southern slums, there's no lock I can't pick and no problem I can't fix" could even be a Paladin who dedicated his life to ending slavery (including picking locks to open slave collars) and helping the the poor, while being adept with a sword.
Come to think about that, you should have made such a Paladin who introduced himself the exact same way and when the nasty guy started his routine, respond with a Smite Evil to his face while explaining the "breaker of chains" thing.Quite frankly, the GM should have stepped in and issued a warning that judging people without knowing anything about them and being an all-around bully directly clashes with the paladin code and if he continued on this path, he'd fall very very soon. The player didn't play a Paladin, he was playing a thug. Intimidating others into shunning a (percieved) odd member from a group is pretty much the epitome of bullying.
| 13 people marked this as a favorite. |
Children don't do that. They can't wait to tell you about their characters. For hours, and hours, and hours...
A) Get a different group.
OR
B) Adjust freaking greatly to compensate for their lack of size.
They don't tell you or each other their names, so each is a lone wolf, therefore you become the same (no aid other, no save other, nothing but self buffs, any and everything that you can find is yours by right of boosting it into your backpack without them noticing).
OOC them without mercy as they seem to enjoy doing so (one-ups-manship, it's not just a thing, it's an entire lifestyle choice for this band.)
Don't hesitate to aid mobs in slaughtering them (they'd do the same to you so by the rules of NN alignment, it's just self defense).
Obviously, A is less stressful than B, yet B can provide a lot of laughs if you're the kind of person who relishes revenge on dummies.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Yeah, dude. Ditch that party.
That sounds horrible. Find a new group.
But first.... murder them.
Edit: Bonus points if you can get an NPC to pay you to do it (negotiated when everyone else wanders off IC or OOC)
I'm telling ya, chief -- follow the squirrels. They're out there. Tell them (the group) you were looking for a buncha nuts you could call by name, share in a meal, and not be embarrassed for being around them. The squirrels will lead you to the good nuts. You're sure of it.
And *then* have your "Network" breakdown -- roast the lot with some well-placed fireballs, and take only the good nuts with you on your exit. To paraphrase Benedict Cumberbatch from Star Trek: Into Darkness (as I so love to do) -- "I now walk over your charred corpses to recover my GRANOLA!!"
Curtains.
Out of curiosity, OP, have you suggested to any of them that they come here and check out this thread?
|
OP, sorry to hear about your health on top of the game nonsense.
And yes, murder them before walking away (unless they are genuine out of game friends).
But HOW?
You are playing Curse of the Crimson throne and you are in book 1 by your posts - introduced to royalty, "selling some jewellery and claiming a reward". so it's already fine if you leave - they will die horribly anyway. The entire AP relies on the PCs being famous in Korsova and an increasing reliance on trust with/against NPCs so they will fail soon enough. Do none of these Emos have a point in Diplomacy?
In any case, if I wanted to murder the rest of my party in this AP I would get them to the hospital and [SPOILERS SPOILERS SPOILERS]
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
I keep seeing the "murder them" posts and thinking you're suggesting it in real life.
Anyway, if you're going to kill their characters, make sure you do it without giving a word of explanation. when they die, it'll be in silence, it's what they would have wanted.
Honestly, these people aren't worth playing with, IMO. If you can't have a frank discussion, as players, that the name-situation is getting ridiculous, and that most people will give at least a nickname upon first meeting, and FOR SURE after surviving a life-or-death experience together, then you need to seek out a different group of players and a different DM, ESPECIALLY if the DM won't intervene.
I would probably start with (as player): "Listen guys, maybe this name-thing and lone-wolf character idea has been fun for you, but it's not fun for me, and I think it's gone on long enough. Can we agree to switch gears and be a cooperative party from now on?"
If they say "no", or start arguing that they can play how they want, then you've got your answer - leave the group and find people who play well with others. I get that you like to game, and sometimes a group is hard to find, but you're heading down a path of continual frustration.
IMO - it's a DM's job to make sure people are having fun, and dismissing the jerks from the gaming group. If he's not willing to do that (or if he's one of them), you need to leave the group.
EDIT: I WOULD NOT stoop to their level and try to get "even" in-game, unless you enjoy that kind of thing. By posting here asking for advice, I imagine you're not this kind of person. Escalating interpersonal conflict using in-game inter-character conflict will NOT end well, and won't accomplish anything.
Sorry to hear about your personal issues, but I think that's another reason to leave the group - you don't need any more crap to deal with.
It's been almost two years, I'm curious to here if you torched them yet.