| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Me: Dwarven Inquisitor of Torag
Human Paladin of Iomedae
Human Cleric of Iomedae
Half-Elf Magus, but dedicated follower of Iomedae
Human Chronicler/Spiritualist
Human Ranger/Bard
Human Wizard...Cheliax and dedicated follower of Asmodeus
The session starts with the wizard wearing open symbols of Asmodeus. He tells us that he plans to give us orders, to take credit for whatever we accomplish, and to blame us for whatever goes wrong. My dwarf voices disapproval of fighting alongside Asmodeus. The wizard remarks that his family own many dwarven slaves, and that dwarves aren't useful for anything besides that. The GM quickly told me that PvP isn't allowed.
The party goes on. The bard player is a friend of the wizard player. They both start mocking the dwarf. The dwarf spits on both. When the wizard flubs a roll, the dwarf mocks him.
We come to slave pens. The wizard argues that the slaves deserve to be slaves because they were born to a low social class. The cleric and I start freeing slaves. The wizard demands that we catalogue the lost slaves so that he can force the pathfinder society to pay restitution for the lost property. I point out that it is hypocritical to kill the slavers without worry and then get upset about freeing slaves. He says that rules are meant to be bent for your own benefit so it isn't something to worry about.
The session eventually ended without further incident, but this really bothered me.
I'll note that the wizard player wasn't a jerk IRL. His character was. He even berated the paladin player for not being more Iomedaen, and that the paladin should have been more upset at all of this.
That said, I felt powerless. That I couldn't actually *do* anything. My character was faced with the embodiment of all he hated, and all he could do was spit? And that cleric + paladin...despite the wizard being "neutral" he was played lawful-evil and worshiped an evil god. Everything he did went against their code. But it was PFS, so their hands were tied. Even the GM couldn't do anything, as PFS doesn't let a GM choose their table...
With that story out of the way, for those who read it, what would you have done?
Also, I pose this question: How can you play a paladin/cleric of a good god in PFS, or a dwarf who really cares about honor...when the 'no evil' rule in PFS really doesn't do anything. You can't smite a fellow party member. The GM can't tell a player that their character is too evil for PFS. You can't get up and walk out, or you just lose your game night.
When faced with this situation, I did the best I could to RP through it, but I was left feeling like there was no way that a paladin or the like could be part of PFS and not fall.
To be honest, I'm about to retire this character because the experience was so unpleasant. I'll be rolling up someone without the code of honor/pride, who is much more mercenary. That way things like this won't be an issue. But is there a way around that solution?
|
Also, I pose this question: How can you play a paladin/cleric of a good god in PFS, or a dwarf who really cares about honor...when the 'no evil' rule in PFS really doesn't do anything. You can't smite a fellow party member. The GM can't tell a player that their character is too evil for PFS. You can't get up and walk out, or you just lose your game night.
There's been several threads with similar experiences if you search the PFS section. Here's some of the answers that have come up. You can refuse to heal/buff the wizard, get in his way if he casts area spells. The no PVP rule means he needs player permission to include you in his area effects. You CAN get up and walk out, but yeah, you'd lose your game and it'd kind of be a jerk move to the rest of the table.
The GM CAN tell the player their character is too evil, or at least he can follow the steps as laid out in the Guide.
Alignment Infractions
Players are responsible for their characters’ actions. “That’s just what my character would do” is not a defense for behaving like a jerk.
Alignment infractions are a touchy subject. Killing an innocent, wanton destruction, and other acts that can be construed as evil might be considered alignment infractions. Ultimately, you are he final authority at the table, but you must warn any player whose character is deviating from his chosen alignment. This warning must be clear, and you must make sure that the player understands the warning and the actions that initiated the warning. The PC should be given the opportunity to correct the behavior, justify it, or face the consequences. We believe a deity would forgive a one-time bad choice as long as the action wasn’t too egregious (such as burning down an orphanage full of children, killing a peasant for no good reason but sport, etc.). Hence, you can issue a warning to the player through a “feeling” he receives from his deity, a vision he is given, his conscience talking to him, or some other similar roleplaying event.
If infractions continue in the course of the scenario or sanctioned module or Adventure Path, an alignment change might be in order. If you deem these continued actions warrant an alignment change, you should note it on the character’s Chronicle sheet at the end of the session in the notes section The character can remove this gained condition through an atonement spell. If the condition is removed, you should also note it on the Chronicle sheet.
Characters who become wantonly evil by performing vile actions deliberately and without motive or provocation are retired from the campaign. This measure is a last resort; there is more than one way to play a given alignment.
If a character has become wantonly evil as defined above, you should escalate the report to the event coordinator, or the local Venture-Captain or Venture-Lieutenant. If they agree with you, then the character is deemed wantonly evil and considered removed from the campaign. Again, these measures should be taken as a very last resort.
In the event of a wantonly evil character, record the character as “dead,” and the person who enters the tracking sheet should check that box as well. If the event coordinator, Venture-Captain, or Venture-Lieutenant decides the character fits the criteria for being wantonly evil, she will then email the campaign coordinator to advise him of the situation, including the player’s name, Pathfinder Society Number, character number, and email address. She will advise the player of these actions and offer the player the campaign coordinator’s email address so the player may present his case.
Wow.
That person sounds… like a dick? You say the player wasn't being a jerk in real life, but I almost think this character was designed to be a jerk. I have a Chelaxian cavalier, LN, working towards Hellknight, who worships Asmodeus; and I'd want to smack this wizard. I suppose the whole taking inventory of slaves to get paid back isn't the worst thing, and it does sound like it fits. Though I question why he wasn't taking down the names of the other random people you killed to pay their families recompense. Seems a mite inconsistent, and designed to tweak heroic players.
If you do run into them again and they run a different character, watch to see if they're played the same. If so, they are probably a griefer. If their other characters are different, then point out that you're at the table as well, and your fun is being impacted by their behavior. They can be stuck up and snooty without going overboard, maybe one or two establishing moments and then they just ignore it? Like, we get it, you're cool with slaves and racist against dwarves. Reminding us of that every chance you get is just annoying now.
Sometimes the table meshes in goals, like my recent Slave Pits table. Specifically was advertised as attractive for Liberty's Edge characters, myself and another player were playing that faction, and everyone else was keen on picking on slavers. Sometimes the characters don't fit super well, and then everyone should just cooperate and gloss over some aspects of their character to just get through the game.
And finally, I think there could be an argument of 'social PvP', i.e. I won't actually swing at them, but every chance I get I'll just verbally snipe at them and be unpleasant. That's just as sucky as getting backstabbed by a player.
|
All you can do is have a brief pause to discuss it at the table with the GM and the other player. If they are just playing their character, they will be willing to tone it down a bit. The core of the issue is that everyone has a different opinion of what constitutes 'evil' but most people have the mental image that their description of it is absolute.
In the given situation, as soon as it became apparent that my character would not under any circumstances work with another character, I'd ask the GM if my character could officially resign from the mission and pick out a pregen to complete the scenario with. It's better than walking away and costing the table a player.
As to alignment issues for goodly characters, you are not responsible for the actions of others. In PFS you have lawfully sworn to cooperate with your fellow Pathfinders, so any infraction on their part remains solely on them. You have upheld your honour by not attacking them.
RPG Superstar 2015 Top 32, RPG Superstar 2012 Top 32
|
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
** spoiler omitted **...
Here's a few suggestions:
1) Re-read the rules in the paladin and cleric class descriptions. Your post reads like you're under the impression that merely being in the presence of someone who doesn't act like a paladin themselves puts the paladin into a smite-or-fall predicament. It doesn't. Don't mix up which edition you're playing.
2) If roleplaying a clash of ethics to that degree isn't fun for you, talk to the other players. Tell them you'd have more fun if their flirtations with the neutral/evil boundary were a bit less flamboyant. If they're the least bit reasonable (and if you are too, and have followed tip #1), then the friction should be greatly reduced.
3) Remember that PFS is an actual campaign, not a string of random events. Like any other campaign, it has a premise. And like any other campaign, you as a player have a responsibility to build an appropriate character. Just like you shouldn't join a campaign that's billed as "righteous heroes face evil to save the world" and then bring a nasty mercenary who demands payment for everything he does; you also shouldn't join a campaign that's billed as "members of a neutral-aligned expeditionary organization get sent on missions with mixed teams" and then bring a character who wouldn't ever be in that role. Make a character to fit the campaign.
Hope that helps!
If a player did something to bother me(not my character) I would talk to him about it OOC. If we could not find a resolution I would try to find another table if possible. I know that in some places that is not so easy.
If that is not an option, or if it is worse than the current table I would look at how much it bothered me and either make another character or just quit that group and look for an online game.
As someone who plays several characters that walk that line on the edge of evil, I don't really think he was too far off in his roleplay. Of course, you have to try to get along with other players, but it is not always necessary to get along with other characters. For instance, I play a LN monk who is dedicated to Zon-Kuthon, and I routinely play at a table with a player you is playing a CG cleric of Desna*. While we butt heads on many things, we both are still working towards the ends of the Pathfinder Society, even if we may have different views on how to accomplish those ends. I also have a cleric of Asmodeus/hellknight who just ran a game with a paladin of Iomedae. They did not like each other at first sight, and I happily pointed out how I (in character) thought slavery was perfectly fine, as "All men build themselves up on the backs of others." If played right it can be very entertaining to have different viewpoints stuck together. Read the short story [u]Noble Sacrifice[/u]. However, if you cannot make it work as players, try to find a way to limit that kind of interaction. I like playing characters at all points of the compass, so to speak, and you can't expect everyone to get along with everyone else in character, as long as you work together, and you know, report cooperate and whatnot. That all being said, if the player is being too much of a jerk, then something can, and should be done about it.
TLDR; You don't have to all get along, in game. Small conflict between characters can be fun, just keep it small and in character.
*The monk does have the vow of silence, so it makes things easier.
As someone who plays several characters that walk that line on the edge of evil, I don't really think he was too far off in his roleplay. Of course, you have to try to get along with other players, but it is not always necessary to get along with other characters. For instance, I play a LN monk who is dedicated to Zon-Kuthon, and I routinely play at a table with a player you is playing a CG cleric of Desna*. While we butt heads on many things, we both are still working towards the ends of the Pathfinder Society, even if we may have different views on how to accomplish those ends. I also have a cleric of Asmodeus/hellknight who just ran a game with a paladin of Iomedae. They did not like each other at first sight, and I happily pointed out how I (in character) thought slavery was perfectly fine, as "All men build themselves up on the backs of others." If played right it can be very entertaining to have different viewpoints stuck together. Read the short story [u]Noble Sacrifice[/u]. However, if you cannot make it work as players, try to find a way to limit that kind of interaction. I like playing characters at all points of the compass, so to speak, and you can't expect everyone to get along with everyone else in character, as long as you work together, and you know, report cooperate and whatnot. That all being said, if the player is being too much of a jerk, then something can, and should be done about it.
TLDR; You don't have to all get along, in game. Small conflict between characters can be fun, just keep it small and in character.
*The monk does have the vow of silence, so it makes things easier.
I strongly disagree in the context of organized play. In a home game, with people you know, and like sure. Push the boundaries of roleplay go nuts. But in a PFS game, there is literally no way this isn't a Jerk move. You KNOW they cant stop you. You KNOW you can say and do basically anything you want short of attacking a player. And you DONT KNOW how the other players will take that. It might be fun for some, but that kind of conflict is definitely not fun for others. And in particular because they CANT roleplay their characters, because of the restrictions of organized play.
Like I said, having inter party conflict can make for a great story, in a game where you are friends with the people you are playing with and in which both the players and GM are not restricted with how they can react to that conflict. Personally I think its completely unacceptable for someone to take this route and in all honesty a similar experience is why I will never touch Organized play with an 11 foot pole.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
Solution: all four good aligned players walk.
Provoking players lack a legal group to run the scenario with. The people who walked, coincidently, have enough players to form a legal group.
|
Personally I think its completely unacceptable for someone to take this route and in all honesty a similar experience is why I will never touch Organized play with an 11 foot pole.
I will say - I've never run into something like this in PFS. The closest was a guy who actually told the table before the session that his character was a bit of a jerk and if he was taking it too far let him know and he'd tone it down.
Now - I've only played PFS at conventions, so that might be skewing my experience. *shrug*
I am of a similar mindset as to Koloktroni. But my takeaway is different. You can't control the actions of others, but you can control yours. Because there isn't anything that someone of strong moral convictions can do (such as a paladin), it is best to just not play that kind of character in PFS.
You wouldn't make a paladin in a game where you are part of an amoral mercenary company, right? Well, I've come to the conclusion that pathfinders are just that. You get paid to kill and steal. The organization will allow anyone who isn't "evil", which pretty much means people who probably won't betray them. They are as happy to have a paladin in their ranks as a slave owning wizard who worships Asmodeus. What matters is that their goals get done.
So this has been eye opening to me. And, sadly, it has made me come to the conclusion that I should retire my character. Playing a serious dwarf and follower of Torag just means biting your tongue to much.
Playing someone who is either a mercenary, or out for knowledge...those two seem to be the 'best' ways to play PFS. That way you really don't care who is at your table.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It's really sad but I agree. It's hard to be virtuous when the system of Society Play means you can't control who it is that you play with, you can't vote problem players out, and players are very likely to use strategies that are more pragmatic than noble, such as the ubiquitous wands of Infernal Healing that most Good characters would certainly object to.
The rules say you can't be Evil, but the reality sometimes also means you can't be Good.
|
|
I started playing PFS in my area, but it served as a gateway to find fellow like-minded players and make friends in order to establish a regular "traditional" home game. Honestly, PFS stresses roll-play over roleplay (even more so as seasons have progressed).
Find the players that aren't problems at the table, and schedule a one-shot game and go from there. You will run into your PFS morality problem (either as a player or spectator) often....part of the environment.
I started playing PFS in my area, but it served as a gateway to find fellow like-minded players and make friends in order to establish a regular "traditional" home game. Honestly, PFS stresses roll-play over roleplay (even more so as seasons have progressed).
How so?
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
How so?I started playing PFS in my area, but it served as a gateway to find fellow like-minded players and make friends in order to establish a regular "traditional" home game. Honestly, PFS stresses roll-play over roleplay (even more so as seasons have progressed).
I'm confused too. The nature of a living campaign makes it somewhat on rails - but the modules aren't exactly hard, so you don't need to optimize that much. (Also - Stormwind called! :P)
I am of a similar mindset as to Koloktroni. But my takeaway is different. You can't control the actions of others, but you can control yours. Because there isn't anything that someone of strong moral convictions can do (such as a paladin), it is best to just not play that kind of character in PFS.
You wouldn't make a paladin in a game where you are part of an amoral mercenary company, right? Well, I've come to the conclusion that pathfinders are just that. You get paid to kill and steal. The organization will allow anyone who isn't "evil", which pretty much means people who probably won't betray them. They are as happy to have a paladin in their ranks as a slave owning wizard who worships Asmodeus. What matters is that their goals get done.
So this has been eye opening to me. And, sadly, it has made me come to the conclusion that I should retire my character. Playing a serious dwarf and follower of Torag just means biting your tongue to much.
Playing someone who is either a mercenary, or out for knowledge...those two seem to be the 'best' ways to play PFS. That way you really don't care who is at your table.
Or it means that you can say something, but that doesn't mean everyone will go along with it. There is no room for my way or the highway thinking in a cooperative game. And to be honest, nothing his character did is "evil". Annoying, perhaps, but not evil. You freed the slaves, and he said his peace about it. Sounds like a good way to play a paladin as well. He didn't stop you, and I am sure you accomplished the mission just fine. Mocking the dwarf might have been a little immature, but what do you expect from a bard? Just kidding all you bards, no need to get uppity and write an angry poem. On topic: If you feel you can't role-play your character in a way that you can work with the less seemly elements of the Society, feel free to retire him. Or save him for games where you know there won't be such a problem. As for what Koloktroni said; I can have a character who is not a nice guy, and might even have some evil tendencies, but that does not make me a jerk, nor is having a character who upholds different beliefs than the other characters a "JERK move." Otherwise, if you play a paladin in a party of thieves and drunkards, you are a jerk. I don't see things that way.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
You freed the slaves, and he said hispeacepiece about it.
Sorry: a pet peeve of mine.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That said, I felt powerless. That I couldn't actually *do* anything. My character was faced with the embodiment of all he hated, and all he could do was spit? And that cleric + paladin...despite the wizard being "neutral" he was played lawful-evil and worshiped an evil god. Everything he did went against their code. But it was PFS, so their hands were tied.
How can you play a paladin/cleric of a good god in PFS, or a dwarf who really cares about honor...when the 'no evil' rule in PFS really doesn't do anything. You can't smite a fellow party member. The GM can't tell a player that their character is too evil for PFS.
It's really sad but I agree. It's hard to be virtuous when the system of Society Play means you can't control who it is that you play with[...]
Easy answer for both of you: you play a good character. Let them play the character they want. Don't try to play their character for them, and be firm in not letting them play your character for you.
What other players are doing has very little bearing on how virtuous you are being. You are not accountable for the actions of those you adventure with, full stop. You're accountable only for your own. And by PFS rules, a character who is acting consistently evil will be removed from the campaign. So paladins are never violating their "don't be too chummy with evil people for long periods of time" vows. From the right up it sounds like the wizard could have been anything from a little annoying to just throwing around some RP friendly trash talk. Nothing as written really sounds evil at all. But...
To be frank, the things that concern me the most is this talk of grumbling about adventuring with an Asmodean, all the way up to smiting another PC or "doing something about them" based purely on not even their actual alignment but their perceived alignment and not based on any specific evil actions. How is that in any way just or virtuous?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
As a LG pathfinder you *know* absolutely that you will have to serve with someone who is borderline, but not quite, evil. You know that this is just one more trial or test set by your deity. You are obliged by your vows to the society to not strike this corrupt soul as you might wish, but it is not the first time you hand has been stayed against your wishes.
Depending on your deity and character:
-You will endure with grim resolve to ignore their incessant prattling and misguided actions and still do what has to be done.
or
-You will harangue this misguided individual with as much venom as he spits at you, but you will hold to your honour and not strike him down.
or
-You will mete out kindness and compliments every nasty word or dead that passes his lips, you will resist any temptation to sink to his level.
or
-You will attempt to guide this individual to a better way, and redeem him from the path he currently follows.
etc.etc.
|
I've played good characters in PFS for a long time. Sometimes I've had lots of fun roleplaying the conflict with another character who is Evil (I don't care what is on the character sheet, the character IS evi), sometimes it gets aggravating.
In my experience, the best weapon by far is to just say to the player "Look, sorry, I'm tired right now and its probably my fault but could you PLEASE just done down the "I am evil nyah hah hah" stuff for tonight. Thanks"
Sometimes coupled with
"You do realize that COOPERATE is a two way street, right? That you're currently seriously pissing off the person who you're relying on to save your life"
Noting the rules and all, as well as reading your description this wizard had to be Lawful Neutral (though with Evil tendencies). But yes, he seemed to be playing a "I know better than all of you, and I will let you know" character.
But what this really brings to my mind is how lucky the party/GM is that the person was playing a wizard and not a cleric or other class that gets an aura of their deity's alignment. Because, last I recall, paladins can NOT work with anyone evil. And a cleric of an evil deity reads as evil for the detect evil ability.
So how does one deal with that without having a serious issue in a PFS session?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Noting the rules and all, as well as reading your description this wizard had to be Lawful Neutral (though with Evil tendencies). But yes, he seemed to be playing a "I know better than all of you, and I will let you know" character.
But what this really brings to my mind is how lucky the party/GM is that the person was playing a wizard and not a cleric or other class that gets an aura of their deity's alignment. Because, last I recall, paladins can NOT work with anyone evil. And a cleric of an evil deity reads as evil for the detect evil ability.
So how does one deal with that without having a serious issue in a PFS session?
Because pinging as evil and being evil aren't the same thing. A good character who is currently entertaining evil intents will ping as evil according to the spell. Likewise with a person under the effects of Infernal Healing. There's even an old convention boon that can give a character an evil aura just from fighting in the world wound a lot, regardless of their actual alignment.
But all of that is really neither here nor there, because characters in PFS aren't held accountable for the alignments and actions of the other PCs.