| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
PVP shouldn't be attempted if the other players haven't given their consent to it.
But could you tell me how it is the fault of the party members that your witch nearly died twice? If they don't have any obligation to risk their life for yours, why should they?
I mean, if you killed the enemies that tried to kill you twice, then you have probably already exacted vengeance.
I think you need to determine whether your DM and group is comfortable with any PVP stuff.
Even if they are, I worry that vengeance against party members will lead to a fracture not only in the party, but between the players. You really want to be careful before starting that.
You might want to consider just having some tough words for them (in character, of course) and having your witch be verbally spiteful for a while. If you're thinking of going beyond that, perhaps some minor shennanigans like putting itching powder in their sheets or something that isn't actually harmful in game terms.
At the very most, and only if you think the DM and players are totally okay with it, and it won't cause unnecessary tension -- look at the various curses on your spell list. Bestow Cure is ideal (though outside your present abilities I think), because you can choose something outside the core options, and could give them non-harmful, but cosmetically repulsive face boils, or perpetually stinky breath, or something like that.
It might also be a good idea to talk with the players about party loyalty and teamwork.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
During our last session my witch was repeatedly attacked to the point of very nearly dying twice over the course of the long fight. None of the other party members except the CG cleric attempted to assist. I feel that my level 3 witch, who is a CN follower of Calistria, would seek vengeance for other player characters not risking enough to save her. However, I as a player don't want to ruin anyone's fun.
Anyone have any tips or advice as to how I could go about getting revenge or avoiding it all together?
This... and the appropriate revenge to is to withold aid as aid was witholden from you. Or be more subtle... such as prioritize the one character that actually tried to help you when it comes to aiding in battle.
I'd have to concur with Drahliana on this. Seeking out revenge in the form of pvp is bad form, but some eye for an eye vengeance may be in order. If they require assistance at one point in another encounter, don't provide it, and if they get angry with you about it, cite the lack of assistance they provided you.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
If you, as a player, don't think that PvP would be a fun way of handling the situation, then find a different outlet for your character. There's no such thing as being bound by "what the character feels", because you control that.
We don't have much info on the specific situations in question here, so we don't know if your character was asking for help and the rest of the party explicitly denied that help or if it was more that they had other stuff going on at the time or what. CN might be selfish, but they might also be a self-sufficient type. Your character survived - might that actually prove that she didn't need their help anyway? Why does your character interpret the party's actions as a personal slight against her?
Furthermore, is this really something big enough to even be worthy of Calistrian vengeance? Calistria is vengeful, but that's different from being petty. In fact, petty vengeance might be condemned for cheapening acts of meaningful vengeance. Do you castrate your lover for glancing twice at another attractive person as you walk down the street? No, you wait until you have proof that they're two-timing on you. Then you ensure that they contract venereal disease and spread it to their partner, and arrange for their tryst to be exposed in the most humiliating and publicly devastating way imaginable. Ideally, both of their lives (or at least their reputations) are destroyed, and neither of them is going to be getting very much action on account of public knowledge that their no-no zone is a no-no zone.
Calistrian justice should be saved for those who really, really deserve it, because that is a sting to be savored.
There's no such thing as being bound by "what the character feels", because you control that.
I honestly wonder what that feels like, to be completely detached and in control of a character.
As a writer and GM, I have created over a hundred characters, each with a distinct personality. I don't have that level of control over a single one of them. Each one has their own goals and aspirations, and while I can guide them to certain things, I honestly couldn't force any one of them to do something "out of character".
So I really do wonder how it feels.
There's no such thing as being bound by "what the character feels", because you control that.I honestly wonder what that feels like, to be completely detached and in control of a character.
As a writer and GM, I have created over a hundred characters, each with a distinct personality. I don't have that level of control over a single one of them. Each one has their own goals and aspirations, and while I can guide them to certain things, I honestly couldn't force any one of them to do something "out of character".
So I really do wonder how it feels.
Actually, you do have that control, you just choose not to exorcise it. Now, exorcising that control may require you to write up a reason as for why your character(s) behaved in a manner counter to how they would normally act, but you can do it, as the characters are only in your head. You do have ultimate control over all of their thoughts, feelings, actions, hope, dreams, and story.
To pretend otherwise is a dissociative excuse.
There's no such thing as being bound by "what the character feels", because you control that.I honestly wonder what that feels like, to be completely detached and in control of a character.
As a writer and GM, I have created over a hundred characters, each with a distinct personality. I don't have that level of control over a single one of them. Each one has their own goals and aspirations, and while I can guide them to certain things, I honestly couldn't force any one of them to do something "out of character".
So I really do wonder how it feels.
I can sympathize with creating characters that are vivid enough that they "have a mind of their own". However, if they only ever have one way of seeing the world, if there's only one course of action that could ever make sense to them in a given situation, that's a lack of depth. It's a very pretty, but very flat, picture.
Consider that you yourself are a living, breathing human being. Are you only ever capable of seeing one perspective? When confronted with difficult circumstances, do you ever feel conflicted? Have you ever been in a situation where you were enough in control of yourself that you could make a conscious decision about how to feel about and react to that situation? Maybe something happens that makes you feel both happy for a friend but sad for yourself? And you could choose how to respond to that conflict?
People rarely have just a single overriding feeling governing their behavior. So why should our characters?
EDIT: To add something more for the OP, there are other ways to play a vengeful sort without actually exacting vengeance. Perhaps you like the idea of a petty Calistrian witch. If she's so petty, she probably holds a lot of grudges. Maybe it gets to the point where there's so many that she can't even keep track of them all, and some of them simply fall through the cracks. You might be able to remember that you were mad at somebody, but maybe you forgot why. And once you realize that you've forgotten why, it's a little harder to rationalize the vengeance. And if you can't rationalize the vengeance to yourself, it's practically blasphemy to exact it in the name of Calistria. Vengeance has to have a purpose, otherwise it's just random acts of meanness. There's probably a god for that, but Calistria's not your gal.
As an example, and to tie it into the OP, my avatar here is named after my favorite character I ever played. Who, after a long slow alignment slide, ended up Chaotic Evil. And oh, how my character could vengeance, several times the character got revenge for things that other players had completely forgotten about or thought were forgiven. Being an evil character, the character could do horrible things for vengeance. The character 'wanted' to do horrible things, and was written as enjoying it.
However, I, as the player controlling the characters actions, often had to weigh the actions the character would take against how I thought the other players would react. And there were times where the action that would be most in character to take would have been painful for real life people, which meant those actions would be passed over in favor of less likely actions. My character wouldn't plan out an assault on another character whose player had experienced real life trauma, wouldn't verbally attack the mental health of a character whose player had a history of self harm, wouldn't kill the animal companion of a player who had just lost a pet.
The consequences aren't always as dire as peoples mental health, but they can make the other players at your table unhappy, angry, or decide they just don't want to play with you anymore. Just a few weeks ago I had a group explode in part because I didn't consider carefully enough how another player would react to something! So you should always consider your characters actions before you take them, especially when party conflict is involved. Sometimes what the character would do has to take a backseat to what the player should do.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My personal rule on allowing evil PCs in a campaign could also apply to a Calistrian PC who potentially feels the need to take revenge on her comrades.
"You may play an Evil/Calistrian PC at my table, but I still require that you be a good teammate to your fellow players. It is YOUR responsiblity to come up with a rationale for why your PC does not indulge in evil acts/revenge upon your fellow players' PCs. If you cannot imagine such a rationale, then you're not ready to play an evil/Calistrian PC at my table. I never tolerate "But it's what my character would do!" as an excuse for inexcusable behavior."
Of course in a campaign where PvP is encouraged/permitted, your milage on such a rule will certainly vary.