So, in case you missed it the first time around you can take a look at this player's history here.
So you might have guessed it... he is at it again!
Lemme give you the breakdown of the situation. Our most recent foray to the post apocalyptic Golarion has left our archer blinded, cured and re-blinded. See the details of that here.
The TL:DR version of the backstory is that this player made a contrary character. He made a (mostly) evil character in an overwhelmingly good campaign when the DM specifically expressed a distaste for evil characters and that they wouldn't have an easy time.
So to pickup where that left off:
We made a phone call back to Moon Nase Alpha with our handy dandy amulets of contact other plane. They sent a gate back to us and our leader lady helped with a Remove Blindness and Heal spell as well as a scroll of Remove Blindness so that our Witch could scribe it to her Hyena's (it isn't really a Hyena) ass (that is how he interprets witch's familiars being a "spellbook"). Our archer friend was much happier. We talked to our leader lady and came to the conclusion it would be in our best interest to at least investigate the ruined city that we are in. My character doesn't think it is a very defensible location to set down a new post apocalyptic city, but meh.
So, we make it to this church place at the middle of town. It was the only stone building in the town, it is in the middle, it is large so it kinda stuck out as a good starting place for exploration. It turns out that this is a church to Sarenrae. Not only that but the place is Hallowed and there is a Magic Circle vs Evil on the place.
... I should take this time for a short interlude. Did I mention that our Witch's familiar isn't a Hyena? Well, it isn't. Our characters haven't known this all along. It had been a normal familiar until recently when our Witch took the IMProved familiar feat. Now it is an Imp. The story is that it has been an Imp all along but it was just trapped in one of it's alternate forms due to backstory plot. It was strongly alluded to in his character's backstory that this Imp killed it's former master - his character's grandma. While his character isn't evil, she does border evil. We have known for some time that the leaders of Moon Base Alpha disapproved of his character's ways (aka alignment) and were specifically concerned about his familiar. ...interlude over.
So, Nipper (thats the familiar) couldn't enter. My (the Hyde type Alchemist) character passed his Spellcraft check to determine the effects of the Hallow and Magic Circle vs. Evil spell that was in effect on the building and has become immediately suspicious of the familiar for not being able to enter. Our Archer saw that the familiar couldn't enter and passed his Sense Motive check (he is a Zen archer and has a huge Wis) to determine that the "Hyena" is clearly trying to cover for not being able to enter. So, despite dwelling on this suspiciousness my character decides that the primary interest is in determining what is going on in this building.
We (all but Nipper) enter the church to find a mostly empty glowing well. This would be the same glowing well that the Shining Child showed us from before. Thinking this is clearly a plot centric well we decided to investigate. My character held the rope and let down our Gunslinger into the well. As soon as he got down there guess who shows up?! Our friend the Shining Child. So, with my character being the tank and thinking he is likely going to have to hold off this grim critter (that is 5 CR above our APL) while they fish up the lost locket from the well, I go off to do so. Long story short: the Shining Child couldn't enter the Church due to the Hallow and Magic Circle vs. Evil. Good for us, bad for it. The down side is that it ended up blinding not only our Zen Archer, but his Roc Animal Companion and Nipper. We got the locket, gave it to the Shining Child who destroyed it and flew off leaving us with a damaged, blinded and hampered party.
We decided collectively that we were definitely going to need to make camp and what better place than this church? It had the Hallow aura up and is the most defensible structure nearby by far. My character didn't really want to leave the familiar outside on it's own to draw attention to where we are at though. So I go outside and find the blinded Nipper cowering about. My character knows that the thing is intelligent so I tell it that we have to get inside to rest. I think it didn't know where I intended to bring it so when I tried to drag it by the collar up the stairs it tried to get away. It did. I told it that I couldn't leave it outside and I would bring it in by force if necessary. It tried to run off while blinded.
At this point my character had some options but his (and mine) suspicion got the better of him. He knew something was up with this familiar. He knows about familiars and that they are alignment dependent. He has about had it up to here with the Witch as well. Now, there is a magical barrier which protects evil things from entering it. The Witch was able to enter but the familiar was not. That makes him feel a bit better about the Witch, but not about the familiar. The jig is up and this has now become the new priority. He is no longer OK with sleeping with this thing near him.
I have my character pull out his +1 Merciful Greataxe and charge the thing. Not trying to kill it, just trying to knock it out and bring it inside so we can get to the bottom of this and rest without alerting nearby critters that we are in this building. It runs away then goes invisible (!). Hyenas don't do that! They do not even have opposable thumbs with which to manipulate wands to do that with! So... 2+2 = if it walks like a duck and quacks like a ducks... its an IMP! It has to be. It is a familiar that can naturally go invisible and is evil. What else can it be? I don't think it is metagaming at this point for my character to come to this conclusion. And I don't want to sleep with that thing near me.
The session ended with the Gunslinger coming back up and saying that the Witch was freaking out due to an empathic feeling coming through its familiar of being in direct danger. I explained what happened outside to the Gunslinger and what my character's concern was. He agreed but also if it was invisible now then it isn't likely to give away our location and also wasn't able to enter so it isn't an immediate issue. What IS an immediate issue is that the Witch can't memorize her spell without her familiar so can't unblind our Zen Archer. So... what to do?
Right now I'm thinking of calling up to Moon Base Alpha and declaring that our party is unsound to continue the mission currently. The Witch is unable to renew her spell list, she has a blind evil invisible familiar that can't enter our camping spot and we have a blind Zen Archer and his Animal Companion with no way to cure them. My goal here would be to report this issue to our boss lady and to the head Gold Dragon guy. I have had my suspicions about the Witch for some time and I know they have too. Now his shenanigans have lead to a non-constructive party. I'm not willing to sleep in the same place that the evil little familiar is in so outside of this church is no longer an option. And honestly, I think it would be a problem back on Moon Base Alpha as well.
So... what is your suggestions on how I should proceed currently? I'm sure you will have questions, I'll do my best to answer them.
...the place is Hallowed and there is a Magic Circle vs Evil on the place ... our Witch's familiar ... is an Imp ... So, Nipper (thats the familiar) couldn't enter.
A familiar is not a summoned creature. Only creatures brought to a location by Conjuration (Summoning) spells and effects are blocked by Magic Circle Against X spells.
shroudb: My character is Neutral Good as is most of the rest of the party. My characters alternate personality (when drinking his mutagen - he is going into Master Chymist) is Chaotic Good. If we are strictly talking about ideals dictated by alignment I couldn't be more polar opposite from it.
I'm not talking about just those ideals, though. My character is concerned that the thing is INNATELY EVIL. OOC our DM has also told us that it is out to get the Witch, if not the party. Now my character has an in character reason to distrust the thing.
I do agree that the alignment system leaves a lot to be desired. However, when dealing with angels and devils and things that are innately alignment driven, I think it is actually needed. This is one such case. But you are correct, this is more of a problem with a contrary player than the actual "evil" alignment descriptor itself.
shroudb: Yeah, I understand. I cannot totally set aside my own opinion, though. I, as a player, do have an opinion and I do not wish to be adventuring with an Evil Imp regardless of whether or not it is Lawful. Just because it is the embodiment of Law does not stop it from being the embodiment of Evil. And actually, that is an opinion share not just by my character but by other members of the party as well.
It is like you said, this thing cannot stray from it's alignment. It IS Evil. I think you are focusing more on the Lawful bit and not enough on the Evil bit.
Keep Calm and Carrion: That is a good catch. I'm not sure my DM's reasons for this. It might be that the Imp was originally summoned when called to this plane and then the familiar ritual was performed. It could be something else, I don't know. My character knows the limits of the spell as well as I do, though. I am aware of the limits of it yet nonetheless, it could not pass the barrier. I am fairly certain my DM knows the limits of the spell as well.
This does raise an interesting question though... what exactly happens if a Witch loses her Familiar? That is akin to a Wizard losing their Spellbook and their Familiar in one fell swoop. Do all of the spells go with it? If she gets a new Familiar does it come with all of the spells that were in the old one? Is there some way to extract the spells from a current Familiar and put them into a new one?
...I think I am going to make a separate post about this issue.
New post on what happens when a Witch loses their familiar here. I'm interested in your opinions on this matter as it appears that the rules leave something to be desired.
I'm a little curious about the notion of a "vow" not to harm.
Lawful doesn't mean honest. Lawful Evil can lie all day every day. A vow from an imp means nothing to anyone with a brain.
Lawful only means they follow a code, but devils are notoriously dishonest...as a rule, as part of their code.
Yep. I'm on the same page as Zedth. Regardless of the fact that Devils are deal makers and contract writers this does not speak at all to intention. Any good Imp would be able to find a way of getting around any sort of contract whether it is verbal or not. Or... he could just lie. He probably has some contract with a higher power that is more important anyway.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
I Think you should give the witch player and his familiar a rest.
Cap. Darling: Yep. I'll just give it a rest so it can murder my character in his sleep.
Val'bryn2: Mmm... I do not think that is correct. In fact, I do not think that it is just INCREDIBLY rare but that it creates a unique being. For things that are innately evil there is no redemption. I believe this was actually explicitly stated in the Book of Exalted Deeds back in 3.x. I believe that Pathfinder goes along with the same concept. Nature spirits, by the way, are not innately Evil or Good.
If there are any further rules for this it may sway my opinion.
shroudb: Where are you getting this information on Devils from? I understand that classically this is how Devils are portrayed. Ghost Rider, et al. However, I do not believe this is explicitly pointed out anywhere in Pathfinder. I did not see it in the Devil entry.
As to the everyone have fun bit: I understand that. Everyone is opposed to a couple aspects of his character, not just me. That is mostly alingment based stuff (including the Imp) and that he constantly is an enemy sympathizer. Honestly, I think this is mostly the fault of my DM. He should have put his foot down during character creation. He gave clear outlines that this would be an overwhelmingly good aligned campaign and that we shouldn't be considering evil characters or tendencies as it would make things extremely difficult. Then this player made this character. He should have just told him, "I don't mind you playing a Witch but you can't be an enemy sympathizer, have evil tendencies, eat people or have an Imp familiar."
Nonetheless, the problem is here. It is truthfully becoming a headache for the DM. He doesn't want to deal with interparty conflicts but he also has to deal with conflicts from his own NPCs. I try to let as much slip as I can but with this situation and the church it is hard to have my character just not notice. Did I mention that we are interrogated when we come back from our missions with truth detection spells? My character isn't going to lie for his character to cover up this kind of activity either.
There has been no talk of killing any characters, FYI. Not sure where you are getting that from. Do you mean like the DM killing the character?
The player is not a vindictive player. Outside of this issue he is actually a lot of fun to RP with. That is largely the reason we tolerate him, in fact.
I really do not think the player of the Witch is 100% correct. I probably am not as well. But when he makes a character that is in opposition to the rules placed down when the campaign started, I'm fairly certain that falls shy of 100% correct by a fair margin. I think the DM conveyed it well but the player put a larger priority on what he wanted to do than what the DM and other players wanted and the DM didn't put his foot down when he should have. ...and now it is too late and it has to be dealt with in character.
| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
It seems to me that you and this player have enough of a conflict that you should not play in games together.
Dave Justus: It has been discussed. As said though we are real life friends and generally enjoy eachother's company. We like gaming with eachother. To my knowledge he has no complaints about me. Everyone has this complaint about him but still tolerates him. Myself included. I am trying to remain constructive and look for solutions that work for us both. I'm running short on ideas.
Dave Justus: It has been discussed. As said though we are real life friends and generally enjoy eachother's company. We like gaming with eachother. To my knowledge he has no complaints about me. Everyone has this complaint about him but still tolerates him. Myself included. I am trying to remain constructive and look for solutions that work for us both. I'm running short on ideas.
Fair enough. My first thought is for everyone else to agree with him. Hard to be contrary if everyone agree with you and looks to you for advice all the time. Obviously this would work best in a new campaign rather than an existing one where you already have established personalities.
What I think I would try if I were you is to try and get the other person so solve the problem. If this is a good friend that you like, explain to him that in you are not having fun and why (trying to avoid accusations and blame) and ask him for help and advice. This approach can also work in character for this specific situation, if your character tells his character about the problem and asks him for ideas on how to solve it, it can open up a lot more possibilities.
At the worst, it will probably crystallize that this character can't work with this this group, at the best it will provide an option for continuing with the other player and his character being invested in making the solution work.
Try trusting his imp to NOT kill you, try it. What's the worst that can happen
Either the player has his imp kill you, and that should send you a clear signal that him playing the game with you to have "fun" is not as important as his need to "win"
Or the player keeps the imp from killing your character because that is more important that any ambition the imp might have, and if the character cannot control their own familiar, then the game has more issues than I care to try and think about.
you see my understanding (and way of running the game for 38 years) is that good does not have to mean you are out there every day trying to save the lives of every thing you can, and evil does not mean you are out there every day trying to kill everything you can. Intelligent (player characters mostly) people need a reason to do things, a reason to do good things and a reason to do evil things. If the imp familiar has a reason to kill the party, then the player needs to stop playing that familiar, as it is counter intuitive to the concept of a cooperative role playing game experience.
I concur with Terquem's sentiment. If the imp THE PLAYER CONTROLS attempts to kill you, then that is most definitely PvP, and is an out of game issue with the player that needs to be dealt with out of game.
Terquem: The player does not fully get to control his familiar. The DM often controls the character. The DM is going along with the whole, "...an imp works to deliver souls to Hell, assuring that its master's soul—and as many collateral souls as possible—faces damnation upon death." thing. I think my character, as well as the rest of the party, is part of the whole "collateral souls" thing.
Also, the player in question isn't one of the "win" type players. I do, however, know the type.
Your description of good and evil fits what I (and my DM) believe too ... with the exception of innately evil things like Devils. Their agendas are different.
Dave Justus: We actually thought of that as well. But agreeing with him and making characters not contrary to his would have required us to all be breaking the rules that the DM set forth for character creation.
Your suggestion is likely going to be the first thing I am going to do. I know that his character doesn't know that it is an Imp. I would ask him if he knew it was an Imp. Once he says, "no" I would ask him what he plans on doing about it. At some point in the conversation to come I would likely say something to the effect of, "Well, I hope you don't expect us all to sleep in the same room as that thing..."
Honestly, I think your "at worst" option is likely my "at best" option. His character is pathetically ineffective and is completely contrary to the goal of this campaign. It has causes both mechanical and RP problems for everyone involved. While I know that might not be the most "fun" option for him now I also think that it might strike home the point that he is the common denominator in these issues and that him being contrary also leads to HIM not having fun. I just don't want to force it. I would rather he come to that conclusion on his own.
I wouldn't have this opinion if this campaign started out with a mixed party ideal or that we didn't have this clear concept of what is expected of our party. If we were making a band of mercenaries it would be a different story.
But maybe some of you are right. If something bad happens and his Imp (or his character, influenced by the Imp) leads to my character's death then I could just make a new character. The next time I make a character I could make super good character whose single minded goal is to destroy all evil. Then I could destroy his current character and every other character he makes that is evil. Oh wait... that would ruin his fun, can't do that. Or I could make a character just like his that is an enemy sympathizer and is really just along for the ride but actually wants to do evil. Oh wait... that would ruin the DM's fun and break the same rules the other player did and likely ruin the other player's fun as well. I know I'm talking extremes here but my point is that maybe the solution doesn't rest as much in my hands as it does in his.
Are we all ignoring that in the witches back story the imp killed its former master? I think that alone makes it untrustworthy. It has established it will kill those it is supposed to help.
Are we all ignoring that in the witches back story the imp killed its former master? I think that alone makes it untrustworthy. It has established it will kill those it is supposed to help.
It is not really relevant since nobody know this in game. As far as i undestood.
And to the OP. Do you fear that the GM will use a class feature of one of the other players to murder the other PCs? Or do you fear that the player will? If the imps plan is to corrupt your PCs then murdering them in there sleep is not gonna do it. Is any of the involver players interested in ruining the campaign? Are you? Dont keep going after the poor guy and his imp. Yes it is a little devil, but you are a big hero, keep an eye on it, and take a Chill pill.| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Any GM who suddenly took over my imp familiar without any forewarning would quickly earn a sit down talk. Does the GM tell the player when he should use Power Attack, or Combat Expertise? Of course not! Does the other party wizard with the fairy dragon risk losing control of his companion? No? Then why should this be any different? That's crossing the line of player autonomy.
HannahJ 08: Thank you for noticing.
Cap. Darling: Well, we don't know but the Witch at least suspects it. But as he doesn't know it is an Imp it limits his suspicion. That will soon be remedied.
Yes, yes I do fear that. Both, to be honest. And I am sure out of all of the players who HAVE ruined campaigns that very few of them actually had the INTENTION of ruining a campaign. I do not understand the significance of your question.
I think some of you think that I am freaking out and raging over a single occurrence one time issue. If you look at the history here, I am not. I'm also not ready to do anything drastic. If I were then I wouldn't be coming here for advice. I'm giving relevant background information to help myself and you all to give relevant advice. This isn't an issue of "me going after the poor guy and his Imp". This is a long running, ongoing issue that I am seeking ways to help resolve for my entire play group.
Lostcause78: Despite his issues, the player himself is enjoyable to play with. No one wishes to kick him out. We just want to curb these two major issues. You are correct, this is the same kind of issues he always has. I am a bit frustrated with the DM for not putting his foot down as he knows these issues as well as all of us. But he didn't so now we have to deal with it.
RD: We have always played Familiars, Animal Companions, etc as a shared thing. Perhaps to some they might find this odd if that isn't their play style. However, it is actually fairly common in my experience. There is even some suggestions and information on it here.
In our case I think the biggest reason is that the player insists that his character and Familiar are all happy good intentioned beings (despite the obvious issues to the contrary). The DM doesn't buy it (likely because of past experience) and believes that the player isn't likely to play the Imp as an Imp and with the correct motivations. In this respect I agree heavily with the DM.
You see, I think the player in question has a Drizzt/Ghostrider/Spawn syndrome. He likes to play bad guys who do good things (and bad things that are particularly annoying and disrupt play and fun for the party....but he doesn't admit that). There is no problem with that until when he DOES do bad things and he justifies it as RPing his character. The pendulum swings both ways but he doesn't play it like that. He justifies his bad actions as "RPing how a character of his sort should act" but when he isn't acting like a character of his sort should act he holds up the player autonomy flag.
If the guy is enjoyable to play with then allow him his quirky characters and play along when he is doing somthing. What you are doing now, at least from my perspective, is trying to make him play different.
If the GM and the player think it is a good idea that he have a Imp familiar then it is not your job to change that. Play your character and if you feel that you can only be true to your character by killing his familiar, then you are the contrary player this time. And you dont want to be. If the other PC kill your PC then it sucks. But as it is now you are the one planning to kill and that sucks just as hard.
Edit: I seem to have read stuff in that wasent there feel free to ignore my takl about killing imps. But the point about enjoying what he bring to the table instead of charging it still stands.
Stop saying that anyone is suggesting killing the familiar. No one has suggested that.
Stop saying that anyone is suggesting killing the familiar. No one has suggested that.
Sorry i assumed that was the plan because of the other thread you made.
You mean the other one where I also never suggested killing the familiar?
You mean the other one where I also never suggested killing the familiar?
Yes that one. Sorry again see my edit of the other post please. And consider if i May be rigth about some of the stuff i say. Just lot the killing stuff;)
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Its ok. You do have constructive things in your post. And besides, while I'm not considering killing the Imp familiar in my game I am considering killing Ravingdork's. Just don't tell him I said so.
Its ok. You do have constructive things in your post. And besides, while I'm not considering killing the Imp familiar in my game I am considering killing Ravingdork's. Just don't tell him I said so.
It will be a secret between you and me, only.
Douchey DM needs to say no to a concept he doesn't like rather than passive-aggressively trying to get rid of it later on.
I don't normally jump on DM's since they so rarely present their side of the argument but I don't really see any way the DM could couch his actions as constructive or fun in this case. Unless I am misunderstanding you, the DM is the only one who wants the familiar to attack the party, based on very questionable reasoning. I don't believe it is ever stated anywhere that any creature MUST be any alignment. To the best of my knowledge, alignments in the Bestiaries are listed for typical creatures, leaving plenty of wiggle room for the existence of atypical creatures.
I don't think there's much you can do. This falls squarely to the DM. He should have this guy make a new character, ensuring that the character adheres to the campaign specific instructions more closely, or he should lay off the Witch and his familiar. He's created a situation that is unmanageable by the player and does not seem to be interested in managing it constructively himself.
Well, I wouldn't necessarily say that the DM is the only one who wants to make the Imp attack the party. But he has been pretty clear about it's intentions and it is pretty much what they are stated in the Bestiary. That makes it pretty clear in my book, it wants to damn the Witch's soul and considers us collateral souls. The player of the Witch, though, I could easily see finding a reason to attack the party or at least have his familiar do so. Of course, I doubt that he would actually say that was his intentions but I could easily see him justifying it as a necessity in the character's/familiar's mind. It hasn't outright happened yet but it has come close more than once. He also is in pretty bad with the rulers of Moon Base Alpha and they have nearly acted against his character and his familiar.
So, honestly, I could see this all blowing up in his face without my interjection. Its just along the way it is going to be a frustrating ride.
I do agree with everyone who says that the DM should do something but I can't force that. I could try to create situations where the DM's best choice is to enforce his own rules. I don't want to go to the point of making it equally un-fun for everyone though as then I am no better than the other player. I don't know how I could force such a situation, though.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So... here is what you do.
1 - Sit down with the GM and ask if he is OK with you killing off anyone else's character.
2 - If he is - find another game - if he isn't then ask if he's ok with you suggesting you are going to kill everyone else and trying to find loopholes (charms, compulsions, geas etc.) to do so but with everyone at the table knowing what you are doing.
3 - if he says yes find another game - if he says no then ask him why he thinks it's fun to do the same thing to your party with the imp.
Based on this answer either explain to him that intra-party conflict *forced* on the players isn't fun and stop it, or he will realize that himself - or find another game.
Honestly it's a jerk thing to do - outside of said charms/compulsions etc. that must be *very* carefully handled or agreed upon by the players this kind of thing just makes a game miserable to play.
RD: We have always played Familiars, Animal Companions, etc as a shared thing. Perhaps to some they might find this odd if that isn't their play style. However, it is actually fairly common in my experience. There is even some suggestions and information on it here.
I figured it was something like that by the way you described it. It is a lot easier when it is expected, or when everyone is already used to that style of play. I was also aware that there were groups that played that way. However, that's not the way it was intended. The designers have stated on multiple occasions, even using examples and arguments like those in my post above, to clearly state in no uncertain terms that that's the way they meant it to be.
(Please note that I am merely, saying that, that was the manner of play the designers intended, not that your style is necessarily wrong or bad somehow--that's only the case when the GM springs the surprise house rule on everyone mid-game.)
I think that normally the GM is fine with letting the players control their minions (animal companion, familiar cohort, etc.). The only time he typically steps in is when the player is trying to have their minion do something that he doesn't believe they would do. This tends to happen most often with animal companions mostly because they do not have character like agendas and it is hard to force them to do complex things. So he takes over at that point.
The only other time it happens frequently is with this player's minions. It has happened in other games when he has had them as well. Mostly, I think it is because while the DM feels that he doesn't want to step on the player's toes for what his actual character can do, even if it doesn't match that character's supposed alignment (/subtype), motivations, personality, agenda, etc. - he does not feel that it is stepping on his toes (as much) to do so with the minion. I can understand that. And honestly, more often than not, I appreciate him doing so.
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
The TL:DR version of the backstory is that this player made a contrary character. He made a (mostly) evil character in an overwhelmingly good campaign when the DM specifically expressed a distaste for evil characters and that they wouldn't have an easy time.
I think this was a big chunk of the issue. Instead of this passive-aggressive 'you can do it, but you'll regret it' BS, he should have just put his foot down and said 'no evil PCs'.
***Update***
So we had our game last night. To begin with I had forgot to mention that inside the church, inside the Hallowed, Magic Circle vs. Evil area there was a permanent Anti-magic Field. Our archer and his animal companion have been biding their time inside this area as that is the only place they are not blind within. This Anti-Magic Field becomes important later.
A magic archway was discovered in side the bottom of the well which lead to different prison cells that were concealed by a Maze spell. My character didn't go in, but the rest of my party did. It was actually very dangerous for them because none of them had a way out of the Maze, only a way back to where they entered it. And besides that our archer and gunslinger had to roll a natural 20 to even escape it. They both finally did but this only lead them back to the prison cell they started in. The Witch (the problem player) had a partial Harrow deck and ended up doing a reading with it and drew one of the few magic cards left in it: the Vizier. This gave her the key to getting out of the Maze. After that it was only a matter of finding the other characters.
Meanwhile, outside the Maze, inside the church my character was waiting there with the archer's Animal Companion. Figuring he was pretty well screwed because he was the only one who didn't go into the doorway and didn't have any way of figuring out how it works or remedying the situation he made a phone call to Moon Base Alpha (we were given items that used Contact Other Plane 1/day but only could call the base). The person who picked up on the other end did not have the means to extract us (couldn't use the gate spell) and said they couldn't contact our leader lady who could as she was in an important conference and couldn't be disturbed. I left a message saying the rest of the party is missing and even if they return he believes that they are a non-functional party and are requesting extraction ASAP. So he started holing up, reinforcing the windows with the pews and started brewing another mutagen.
Just then the party made it out. First item of business was discussing the Familiar situation. My character explained what he had seen. The archer stated that he had made a successful sense motive check on the Familiar and could tell that it was purposefully hiding something. The group expressed their general uneasyness with the Familiar. The Gunslinger (who is woefully ignorant of magic things and doesn't understand the differences in innately evil Familiars and whatever a "regular familiar" is) is disturbed by it but partially ambivalent. Her philosophy is if he sees it do anything questionable to the party he will just kill it. The Witch is in denial and disbelief that the Familiar is anything other than a normal Hyena despite what was described to her. It was also at this juncture that the Witch's player states that it isn't an Imp. I was mistaken. It is a Quasit. ...I think I'd rather it be an Imp. If anything I think a Quasit's motivations are worse.
Once the Witch moves outside the Anti-Magic Field (where we were discussing this) the Empathic Link kicks back in and the first emotion the Witch feels is something like "aw, damnit" followed by something like, "oh, hello master, I missed you". She called the familiar to come back to the group. It did. We asked her to bring it in so she could "scribe" the scroll to her familiar. It, of course, wouldn't enter. We asked her to come in to further discuss the issue. When she did, the familiar didn't want to be left outside alone so it starting whining and yapping and full on barking. It was purposefully raising a ruckus and throwing a 3yr old tantrum to try to get it's master to not go inside. My character, of course, took this to be it plotting against us.
We all asked if she could please get her Familiar under control and make it shut up. She stated that she tried but it wasn't working. We expressed our concern that it was going to draw attention to us and likely bring some enemy down on us when it comes to investigate and we couldn't let it just do that. It also wouldn't (couldn't) enter. My character spoke up and said that if she couldn't silence it that he could. When the Witch heard this she sent an empathic emotion to it along the lines of "shut the f+!$ up, you are in immediate danger if you continue". When we got out it had shut up. Since it wouldn't come in the Witch went outside and tried to scribe the scroll to the Familiar. ...and failed. Now we have no way of curing the blindness of our companions.
Did I mention that the Familiar was also blinded? Well it is. We made the mistake that one of it's forms being a bat that it could use echolocation but blindsight isn't part of a Quasit's abilities. It only gets Beast Shape 2 which doesn't include that. So we ret-conned it to have been using Scent. So after failing the Scribe check (which for a Witch means that it ate the burnt remains of the Scroll) it wanders off on it's own as we cozy in and camp for the night in the church. We discuss the issue further in character and out of character.
My character's suspicion is that it purposefully ate the scroll and caused a failure in the scribe check to keep the archer and his animal companion blinded. The Witch is starting to believe this might be true as well especially considering the purposeful fit of a barking that had just transpired. Nonetheless we couldn't do much about the issue now as we didn't have the means of curing it so we are pretty much just stuck awaiting extraction.
We discussed the situation out of character. I expressed that his contrary play style is affecting our fun. The DM agreed and stated what his intention when starting this campaign was and that he warned the player that this would eventually happen if he made the character as intended. I asked the player that if he knew that his character decisions were affecting our fun and we chose to not tolerate it both in character and out of character what his thoughts were on this. I asked if he was willing to put his own personal enjoyment ahead of ours knowing that it was causing conflicts that we didn't want to deal with. His basic answer was "yes" and that he would likely leave the game if he didn't get to play his character as designed. It really sounded like he wasn't even willing to give an inch.
I pointed out that while I think the current problem is largely the Witch's player's fault that I think a portion of the blame rested on the DM's shoulders. The DM agreed but stated that he is having the same conversation now that he had when we started the campaign. He also stated that prior to this game he gave the player an option to bring in a different character that was more suitable to the campaign. It sounded like this was discussed in length and that the other character was basically created and ready to go. However, the Witch's player stated at that time that he really didn't have interest in bringing that character in. The DM stated that he should prepare himself for the familiar being disallowed because when we return to Moon Base Alpha that it will not be accepted and immediate means of containing the creature (if not destruction of) would be taken. Even with the DM outright saying this the player didn't believe that it was as cut and dried as that and that some influence on his character's behalf would/could make a difference.
So even though the issue came to a head out of character we all decided to let the campaign naturally bring it to a head in character. So we decided to keep playing for the time. I realized that the character was still in denial and didn't yet necessarily even believe that her Familiar was actually something of innately evil intent. The character did make Knowledge checks that were very high in determining what the Familiar could be if it had these abilities but didn't want to believe it. It was at this time that I had an epiphany that I am surprised I hadn't thought of previously; the Anti-Magic Field wasn't fully within the Hallowed and Magic Circle vs Evil. There was a point at a window of the church where they didn't overlap. If we could manage to throw the Familiar through the window, it's true nature would be revealed!
I tried to convince the Witch that this was a good idea and she had within her means the power to do this in the most humane way possible: she could put it to sleep with her Slumber Hex. She refused believing that doing so would be "purposefully acting against a member of her party". I denied this claim stating that first of all the party did not think of his Familiar as a "member of this party" and secondly that it had already acted against the party by purposefully concealing it's identity and powers from the party. She still refused to take part in it. I stated that we would likely never have a better opportunity to fully reveal it's true nature like this again. I also pointed out that since extraction still hasn't happened 9+ hours after we made our call that we have to realize that we may never get extracted. We may be forced to deal with this situation completely by ourselves. None of us wish to continue with the unknown looming over our heads. With the solution so close at hand there is no good reason to not take advantage of it.
The Witch still refused. With a sigh, my character unslung his Merciful Greataxe and strode outside stating, "I'm not going to let this opportunity slip through our hands. I am putting that dog through that window and that will be the end of this mystery." The Witch didn't try to stop him (she couldn't if she tried, honestly) but tagged along. In fact, the only thing that stopped him was that he couldn't find the Familiar outside at all. It had, of course, turned invisible and flew above the church.
Unbeknownst to our characters this entire time the Familiar had been listening to us from outside (we, of course, knew this out of character). It no longer trusted it's master. The Familiar was pushing Evil thoughts to the Witch trying to convince her to murder us all. It was at this point that the Witch started recalling what happened in her past to have pushed her down the path of Witch in the first place. She remembered her grandmother talking about the first time she found the familiar. She remembered that it was swimming around with glowing red eyes. Then she remembered that it was actually swimming around in a cooking pot or cauldron. Her grandmother had ATE the Familiar! She also remembered the exact time her Witch powers manifested. It was when she obtained the Familiar. In fact, she remembered ... cooking and eating her own grandmother! It was at that time that she realized that the Familiar wasn't a separate being. It was actually her own Evil actions manifest! Likely just as it was for her grandmother. Surely the Evil actions of her grandmother left her soul being damnged to Hell and HER Familiar delivered it there. And as a result it also created the perfect situation for another's soul to start down the same path. The Witch, having come to this conclusion in a rush of emotions went mad and cowered in the corner while trying to process this grim discovery.
...and that is where we left off. I do not know what will happen next. I do not know how the character or player will handle this. I'm not sure how I or my character will react. I just wanted to post this here so you all knew what happened.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
This sounds....painful. And like no game I would ever be interested in joining. I do hope you find an agreeable solution and things become more enjoyable for your group. To each his own. Best of luck to you.
Sorry for the long winded post. I also should mention that it was also brought up OOC that we were trying to think of a different solution. I said that I would be willing to make a new character (you all may have seen some of my recent posts about an Emberkin Aasimar White Mage Arcanist) with the same guidelines that the DM set forth when we started this campaign. The problem with that is that I think that the new character would actually be FAR MORE biased against the presence of a Quasit in the party and many of the Witch's recent actions. Last session alone she had summoned a demon with a scroll of Lesser Planar Ally. She got a Babau who she discussed trying to get some talking skull that is the equivalent of the holy texts of Lamashtu from. (it didn't cooperate when it was discovered that the talking skulls were actually made from Babau skulls...) She also had been praying to Mars to activate a magic item she had. In this setting Mars is diametrically opposed to Diana, whom half of the party has converted to worshiping.
And that is the issue. If we all follow the character guidelines that our DM set forth during character creation the characters we would make would be opposed to his. The DM actually was thinking at this time that normally his character doesn't actually act Evil. Despite what I just stated happened last session, he is right. The scroll he cast Lesser Planar Ally from was obtained from a worshiper of Mars, it could have been influenced by the creator of the scroll. Same with the magic item he was activating via UMD. The part about Lamashtu is just his character expressing curiosity with a nature based god (his perspective) and trying to learn more about her Patron.
The DM's point, though, is that despite what alignment is written on his character sheet that if he didn't follow this alignment then the issue of the Familiar is moot. If his alignment changed even one more step away from where he was then he wouldn't qualify for having a Quasit as a Familiar. I think this is actually why he had the character remember her past. It is a way of forcing the player to deal with his own characters actions and motivations not matching his written alignment.
Maybe my DM is more clever than I gave him credit for. Maybe this will all work out to our advantage.
Hm. I wonder if/when I should start a part 3.
Our next game is Sunday. GM has basically stated that there is going to be no way for the Witch to continue to be able to keep the Familiar. I think that everyone is going to be willing to chip in to replenish her "spell book". At this point I have a new question for the boards.
I talked to the GM tonight. We came to the consensus that the Witch's player does this as a form of ensuring his time in the spotlight. We think what he actually wants out of it is to have some part of the story to focus on him and force the party to help him through a tough time. I wont say that we are suckers for it but I think we would prefer to cater to this now than to either enforce a decision that would cause him to leave or flat out kick him. The problem is I think he would prefer a story solution that involves some interaction on his part than something happening around him.
So I was thinking about this... I'm not sure how to ask the question so I will give an idea of what I was thinking. I was thinking that because the Quasit is supposed to be the embodiment of his sin and we wouldn't want to destroy it just for it to get sucked back into the Witch we would probably seek to cleanse it instead. So how could we do that? Perhaps an Atonement spell cast upon the Quasit? I could see the physical manifestation of their sin as being a curse that follows her family. Perhaps a Remove Curse spell cast upon the Familiar as well? So then with it cleansed and the curse lifted it would need a form to match it's new purpose. Perhaps a Polymorph Any Object to accomplish this?
Maybe we could convince him to give it the form of a Homunculus by using part of her own body to craft it. Maybe we could convince the DM to allow it to have some of the same powers as the Quasit as well to encourage this. Maybe it's new form would be appropriately represented as a Mephit instead.
Sounds like alot of Psycho-drama.The DM must enjoy it,otherwise he wouldn't be doing it.There is no "in game" solution.It's all fiat.
I wouldn't even worry about it,your gonna fight stuff anyway.Imp or not.The most he can do is change the order a little unless the DM is out to TPK,then your just SOL anyway.
Look, I just said that we would all prefer to keep it constructive if possible. I am looking for a solution that accomplishes that.
I don't need advice on how to kick a player. Thats easy. We just say, "F@&+ it. You are out." and that is the end of it. Same for the party getting fed up and killing his character. It wouldn't be hard, we don't need advice there.
If you can't give constructive helpful advice then I would request that you not post in a thread asking for advice in the advice forum.
Cap. Darling: Yep. I'll just give it a rest so it can murder my character in his sleep.
Val'bryn2: Mmm... I do not think that is correct. In fact, I do not think that it is just INCREDIBLY rare but that it creates a unique being. For things that are innately evil there is no redemption. I believe this was actually explicitly stated in the Book of Exalted Deeds back in 3.x. I believe that Pathfinder goes along with the same concept. Nature spirits, by the way, are not innately Evil or Good.
If there are any further rules for this it may sway my opinion.
Well, according to Pathfinder's Wrath of the Righteous
Besides, devils are pretty much fallen angels right? Means alignment for outsiders isn't as draconic, though it'd take a great epiphany to change it.
Also, according to the Bestiary 3, Asuras can become good.
Of course, at the end of the day, it is up to the GM.
Also, I vote for quest for atonement.
I am not throwing a tantrum.
When someone is asking for advice on X, saying, "You should do Y instead." when Y is directly opposed to X is not helpful.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
My advice is simple: If You Think You Can Do the Job Better (& it might well be that you can), You Should Be the DM.
DM's are kinda like politicians. Good ones get re-elected; & bad ones, voted out. But even if it's a DM with whom you enjoy general comity, (& again) much like those of any politician, the only judgments you're gonna agree with 100% of the time are your own. Therefore, you must petition to be the DM (i.e., in effect, "run for office")....or continue to put up with "The Wolverine." As long as you mean to stay in the gaming group, I can think of no good 3rd option.
Thank you, Peter. I have done it before. I do not think that I am a better DM. In fact, I'm not comfortable making that kind of judgement at all. However, I will say that the one thing that I learned is that the problem player's agenda can be curbed. I gave a set of rules for character creation before we started playing. I said if you want in the game you have to abide by these rules. He made his character according to those rules and I think it is the smoothest game we have ever played with him.
...unfortunately it still ended in him turning on the party. To my defense he was charmed by a Siren, though. A lot of those things that would normally give your character a save he denied the save for saying that it was within his character to act close to the way she was directing him to. He was right, really. It did upset the party, they had gripes they brought up and basically everyone lost interest in playing that game. I wasn't broken up by it, though. Our current DM and I typically go back and forth as being the ones who DM. I was ready to tag off.
I DMed again and ran everyone through The Red Hand of Doom module as my son's first formal group experience in playing Pathfinder. I gave very similar rules to character creation that time. We made it all the way through that module with everyone being constructive. The only time he was even a little contrary was when he had to hold the paladin (current DM's character) back from attacking the Ghost Lord. If you are familiar with the module, it is a good thing he did too. That entire campaign went off without a hitch.
I get your meaning, though. I guess at this point I am looking for ways to petition the GM. I hate pointing out problems without bringing a solution. For this I believe it has to involve an in character solution as well as an out of character solution. And the DM has to be onboard 100%. So I am looking for ideas for the DM to use, basically.