I am having a bit of an issue where one of the characters in my group is basically being a bit of an nasty piece of work. A second is looking a Fleshworm infestation as a spell which is a Evil spell
As far as I can tell repeated castings of it would shift alignment but this doesn’t really DO anything for anyone except clerics and paladins (nether are)
I find it against the spirit a little bit. Especially as the caster would shift to LE which puts him far more in line with the regime philosophy he is opposing than, say, the underlying values of the city and the Milani cleric in his party
Implementing alignment changes seems pointless both because it would cause whinging , potential inter party arguments and also because I can’t really see a negative to being evil
Indeed as an evil character you are unaffected by some of the really nasty divine spells thrown by the baddies in this AP. There also seem to be things in book 6 where being evil will help
So is there actually any real negative should my players shift towards evil - and concrete ones not ones that can be met with “you are being unreasonable in that interpretation of how x would react”
(I will admit the whole “becoming what you are trying to defeat” is an interesting potential story but I am interested in if there are any downsides)
If your players decide to play evil characters there isn't a mechanic built into the system to prevent it.
But why would Octavio stick around? Or Laria? Hetamon? Rexus? A lot of the supporters of the rebellion? Any clerics that have been helping the group? The nobles likely wouldn't side with them... There's a lot of people that should leave the rebellion if they start being evil.
Why would people follow them as crusaders that are out to get rid of Thrune? (Live with the devil you know, and all that jazz)
And they'll learn in book 6 what happens to evil people when they die.
Blosodriette gives a -1 penalty on Loyalty if she's an ally. The leaders of the rebellion would surely give a larger penalty than that if they were evil.
|
It may not work for your group but with mine I would start hitting them with unsettling story elements to make them realize that they are slipping alignment wise. Dreams about worms eating rotting flesh... and things of the like.
Brief desires to end conversations quickly with violence rather than with conversation etc.
Things like that are usually preferable to just telling a group that they are starting to do questionable things.
I mean... if they have a cleric of a good alignment or a paladin things like that become much more obvious.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Sometimes when I read your posts I get the sense you and your players are not on the same page. Players should be free to take their characters where they "think the character's story goes" or "wherever their whim takes them" pending how the player views the game. But there is a caveat - the players have a responsibility to consider the impact on the GM. If the players have pc's go wildly off the rails, they should expect there may be consequences when the GM has the world react however he/she deems "authentic" to the story/world (or his/her own whims.)
When the AP player's guide says you shouldn't play evil characters without extensive consult with the GM if at all, that means something. It's a message to the players that evil characters will make the GM's life more difficult, make the story hard to sustain and might just piss him off. If they do it anyway, they don't get to whine about the consequences.
Beyond the fact that none of the NPC's allied with the Silver Ravens and none of the rebellion's supporters should willingly tolerate evil characters in a position of leadership, why are the other pc's tolerating it?
Casting fleshworm infestation is an evil act. It should move the caster's alignment to evil after the 2nd or 3rd casting (at the latest) and that should have consequences - rebels should leave, gods should withdraw support, etc. It isn't really all that interesting of a spell either.
No one is going to want to risk their lives to replace one megalomaniac sadist with others. For that matter, protection of the populace from such things is exactly the PR message of the Church of Asmodeus.
Pretty significant spoiler for the AP ahead - if you're not GMing it, don't read it.
One of the challenges here might be a flawed but reasonable assumption your player's could be making: they might assume the entire AP is a total war against Thrune and are adopting maximum ruthlessness. Except the AP isn't a 6 book fight against Thrune at least not in a convention sense. Starting in Book 5, the Silver Ravens need to actually lead the city, something they can't really do if they are widely despised and feared schmucks.
Primarily in this instance the player has identified fleshworms and thought “that spell is really powerful because by my reading it carried on even if they pass the first save and has a nasty effect even with a successful save”
And i am anticipating the following conversation:
Me: Casting that too many times will turn you Evil
Him: So what?
Now this might not happen but i am just anticipating it
I do partially anticipate the challenge of “how is killing them that way any different to fireball” - I assume it is the slow agony
There is an element of not being on the same page as one player did not read the players guide and made what he wanted and another made what he wanted and then very loosely linked it in with the players guide
I do partially anticipate the challenge of “how is killing them that way any different to fireball” - I assume it is the slow agony
Nope. It isn't the killing - it's the power source. The spell is a conjuration summoning spell and since it's labeled as Evil that means the source is some kind of Dark Awful the mere use of which perverts the user. The game is built on the assumption that some kinds of magic are inherently Evil regardless of the purpose to which the magic is put. Even if you use the spell to cure cancer, you're still Evil. If you summon Cthulhu to get the kitty down from the tree, you're still irredeemably damned. (And insane.)
That is interesting - I did not realise that
Intriguingly when googling this spell there is a reddit discussion of "most unnerving spells". Most of these I believe are on the Witch list
I am considering trying to now find a way of littering the after effects of some of these around
As I alluded to in another post i am concerned with some of Barzillai's main allies just appearing in book 4 and PCs killing them all without knowing much. For example my players currently have no knowledge of any Witch in his employ and the link to the tooth fairies (the root of that summons was something that disgusted them)
So trying to add more would be interesting
I don't have many other examples of depraved summons she could do (potentially a positive statement about how my mind works?! )
* As a complete aside I am looking at ways to completely rebuild her or at least change her spells since she seems utter garbage for a 11th level caster
You started your campaign with one of the PCs being evil, right?
What did you have in mind for the reaction of the NPCs? Or is it something that was just going to be ignored by them?
I assume that the PC that started off as evil is still useful and not off-putting to the NPCs. Casting an evil spell is something else though... The player is choosing to use a spell that kind of sounds like a form of torture. If the player doesn't see a problem with that the PC is becoming the evil that they're fighting against.
Why would any good person aid someone that is so easily being corrupted?
|
Primarily in this instance the player has identified fleshworms and thought “that spell is really powerful because by my reading it carried on even if they pass the first save and has a nasty effect even with a successful save”
And i am anticipating the following conversation:
Instead of that conversation, consider having this one instead:
You: "by my reading, the spell doesn't do that."
If he then goes on to complain that you allowed it to work like that previously, explain that you're not a judge and are allowed to change your mind.
Instead of that conversation, consider having this one instead:
You: "by my reading, the spell doesn't do that."
If he then goes on to complain that you allowed it to work like that previously, explain that you're not a judge and are allowed to change your mind.
But it totally does read that way.
Link to Spell
From memory one of the guys didn’t start as evil but that was quickly proven to be false by actions in character
They were neutral but acted evil but didn’t want to actually stick a sheet with NE in front of my nose at the very start because they correctly gauged my reaction. So I was sold the idea of someone on a redemption path towards Sarenrae and NG inspired by Shensen
That just never really happened in game and it became clear that this player saw the idea of acting good as a burden on their choices of actions and interpreted neutral as an excuse to do whatever they like
*
I brought up the evil spell thing with the player of that character and their initial reaction was “neutral character can cast evil spells”.
I told them their alignment would change and he tried to argue it should already have changed to good because of “all the good stuff I have done” throughout the campaign - in this instance arguing that taking part in the rebellion and doing the missions would make him move to good. This is much more nebulous to me than aligned spells
*
On the spell itself - I am not sure I really think it is too powerful as I haven’t seen it in action. Touch attack hurts it even if spectral hand can be used
If he feels like his character is doing more good things than neutral and wants to shift to good then let him. (Unless you completely disagree with him.)
And yes, a neutral character can cast evil spells (so can a good character) but it still shifts them towards evil.
But be prepared for the player to think that if casting an evil spell makes them evil that it means that they can simply cast a good spell (such as Bless Water) will make them good. At which point, I would say that it's the intention behind the spell. Using Fleshworm Infestation is caused to hurt someone over many rounds (and that seems evil, even if it's against an enemy). If they're simply casting good spells to try to keep their alignment as not evil I wouldn't let it work because they're not actually trying to do a good thing.
Alignment is tricky and it sounds like your player(s) lied to you and want to play a very different game than what Hell's Rebels is.
And that's unfortunate.
As I alluded to in another post i am concerned with some of Barzillai's main allies just appearing in book 4 and PCs killing them all without knowing much. For example my players currently have no knowledge of any Witch in his employ and the link to the tooth fairies (the root of that summons was something that disgusted them)
So trying to add more would be interesting
I don't have many other examples of depraved summons she could do (potentially a positive statement about how my mind works?! )
This is a sometimes (ofttimes?) discussed challenge with the AP. Might better to move it to one of the GM threads as it gets pretty spoilery. (That is too a word.)
Short version: hard to introduce them earlier since they can curb stomp the pc's especially if the pc's try to take them on. You can try to have the pc's hear rumors about them doing nasty stuff but even that might motivate the pc's to try to hunt them down.
I brought up the evil spell thing with the player of that character and their initial reaction was “neutral character can cast evil spells”.
I told them their alignment would change and he tried to argue it should already have changed to good because of “all the good stuff I have done” throughout the campaign - in this instance arguing that taking part in the rebellion and doing the missions would make him move to good. This is much more nebulous to me than aligned spells
The player is conflating to things - performing acts that might be judged as either good or evil can move your alignment especially if that is the character's intent. Even an Evil character can save the kitten from the burning tree without becoming Good. If a character performs a series of altruistic acts as part of an intent to change alignment - great his alignment moves. Also true for evil acts.
However magic that is inherently Evil expedites the process. The magic itself is corrosive or perversive or corruptive, etc. and using it is an explicit loss of volition against becoming Evil. The character is making a simple bargain of sorts - I willingly embrace dark and foul powers to get the power to cast this spell/use this magic.
The character might have been moving toward good through his actions but casting the Evil spell obviates all of that and creates the go directly to Evil result; Do not pass Go, Do not collect $200. The player (character?) appears to believe alignment is some kind of dodge or con to be moved around however is convenient to get more power. Which in and of itself is a form of Evil.
You have two choices - roll with it as it seems you may have already been doing or create consequences for them being or becoming evil, consequences that matter to them. Whining is almost certain to follow the latter.
As I alluded to in another post i am concerned with some of Barzillai's main allies just appearing in book 4 and PCs killing them all without knowing much. For example my players currently have no knowledge of any Witch in his employ and the link to the tooth fairies (the root of that summons was something that disgusted them)
So trying to add more would be interesting
I don't have many other examples of depraved summons she could do (potentially a positive statement about how my mind works?! )
This is a sometimes (ofttimes?) discussed challenge with the AP. Might better to move it to one of the GM threads as it gets pretty spoilery. (That is too a word.)
Short version: hard to introduce them earlier since they can curb stomp the pc's especially if the pc's try to take them on. You can try to have the pc's hear rumors about them doing nasty stuff but even that might motivate the pc's to try to hunt them down.
You make a very strong point. I need to try and find some higher level nasty spells that could foreshadow her but but them off
I imagine i will make her higher level than presented due to how weak she ends up being as a villain. I will also have to try and dig up those threads discussing an alternate class for her as her archetype appears to offer no real benefits (and they won’t really find out either way)
But I have already had my players :
- discuss trying to find Zella after I did roguerogue’s Dolores Umbridge takeover
- discuss searching for the dragon as early as book 1 (in book 1 they got distracted by Vendelfek and assumed he was the blue dragon)
- muse on finding the high priest / going to the temple : pretty much the only time I have pulled the “are you sure you want to do that” GM trick
- try hunting for Hei Fenn in Vyre
So I understand how care is needed!
|
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
That sounds like nasty situation to me if players play "neutral" characters who are truly evil because they want to trick GM allowing evil characters :P Like, who would want to play with dishonest players trying to trick GM?
Like, its honestly completely valid option to just rule evil alignment as "NPC only. If you turn evil, you become NPC", but most GMs avoid that because they have faith pcs won't abuse gm's trust.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I had a chaotic evil PC in Hell's Rebels. But this wasn't a player's excuse to play a murderhobo or try to derail the campaign. The player and I talked about it extensively beforehand and we both felt it was a realistic consequence of the character's horrific experience. Basically, the character was captured by Thrune and tortured for a month before being saved. It also helps that the player actually played the character and didn't just use alignment as license to do whatever they want. They were ruthless, remorseless, and vindictive but not a random murderous sadist. Eventually they started a path towards redemption of a kind and went to chaotic neutral. That is before a summoned fiend completely shattered their spine.
Point is evil characters aren't the problem, though certain concepts are definitely incongruous with an AP, it's an issue of players.
I had a chaotic evil PC in Hell's Rebels. But this wasn't a player's excuse to play a murderhobo or try to derail the campaign. The player and I talked about it extensively beforehand and we both felt it was a realistic consequence of the character's horrific experience. Basically, the character was captured by Thrune and tortured for a month before being saved. It also helps that the player actually played the character and didn't just use alignment as license to do whatever they want. They were ruthless, remorseless, and vindictive but not a random murderous sadist. Eventually they started a path towards redemption of a kind and went to chaotic neutral. That is before a summoned fiend completely shattered their spine.
Point is evil characters aren't the problem, though certain concepts are definitely incongruous with an AP, it's an issue of players.
This sounds like a functional approach and not what seems to be happening in Lanathar's campaign. Especially the "talked about it extensively beforehand" part.
Though I would point out in a fit of contrariness that "random, murderous sadist" is pretty much the textbook definition of Chaotic Evil. It's like living with an unleashed rabid dog - it's not a question of IF its going to turn out badly, it's a question of WHEN.
As always it is talking things through that is the important step and something I will have to trigger
I think my players are trying - for example the ex assassin refused the option of killing sleeping Menador guards as they slept
But then responded to being labelled as evil by the archons by stomping down the hallway shouting “but I am neutral” from the other end and then going and collecting a pile of flayed skin from a room with no real reason behind it (no one had identified them as anything)
So talking as always will be best
It is also why I wanted to make sure I raised the Fleshworm thing before it happened
(One way around would be to cast it one a player and make it very horrific . Or do what I alluded to and have them come across a victim who had been subjected to it by Tiarise - alarming that I should be getting ideas for the NPC with from the PC witch!!)
I had a chaotic evil PC in Hell's Rebels. But this wasn't a player's excuse to play a murderhobo or try to derail the campaign. The player and I talked about it extensively beforehand and we both felt it was a realistic consequence of the character's horrific experience. Basically, the character was captured by Thrune and tortured for a month before being saved. It also helps that the player actually played the character and didn't just use alignment as license to do whatever they want. They were ruthless, remorseless, and vindictive but not a random murderous sadist. Eventually they started a path towards redemption of a kind and went to chaotic neutral. That is before a summoned fiend completely shattered their spine.
Point is evil characters aren't the problem, though certain concepts are definitely incongruous with an AP, it's an issue of players.
This sounds like a functional approach and not what seems to be happening in Lanathar's campaign. Especially the "talked about it extensively beforehand" part.
Though I would point out in a fit of contrariness that "random, murderous sadist" is pretty much the textbook definition of Chaotic Evil. It's like living with an unleashed rabid dog - it's not a question of IF its going to turn out badly, it's a question of WHEN.
I take your contrarianism and raise it by one devil's advocate!
I'd argue that the textbook is wrong. Random murderous sadists can be any evil alignment, or even neutral if they curb their worst tendancies. Lawful evil sociopaths just stay within the laws of society, honor, religion etc when committing their evil. Nor does chaotic evil mean that you have to be the Joker- all you need is a defiance of law and order and the lack of scruples to do whatever you see fit regardless of how it hurts others.
Additionally, having an evil character in the party doesn't guarantee they'll backstab their friends or do something equally stupid. Evil characters still have motivations, beliefs, and goals: they aren't rabid killing machines (or don't have to be anyway).
Anyway this is devolving into an alignment rant someone please help me... oh god it's too late... SAVE YOURSELVES!!!
My apologies for starting something that was always going to move to an alignment rant
For what it is worth the caster player has picked enervation instead of fleshworm infestation
And last session there sounded like an appreciation of the need to move in a more positive direction - we are at the end of book 3 so whether they get a chance is another matter :-P