| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
Does anybody else hear an echo?
It sounds like you're playing 1e, but it may be worth noting that Sarenrae is a goddess both of redemption and of smiting down evil. In 2e she has both aspects in her anathema (ie acts which the cleric must not do or lose their divine access). You must offer any repentant creature a chance and you must not fail to strike down evil.
Of course, this us one of those fiendishly complicated scenarios the likes of which discussion went round and around in the 2e forum just last week. The main complicating factor is whether a fiend, a being literally made of evil, is a creature that you can realistically redeem without extenuating circumstances.
Aren't lemures mindless?
Even Sarenrae has her limits. She might disapprove if it was a mortal, the living are rarely beyond redemption. But undead and fiends are, almost by definition, not worth trying. Fiends are literally MADE of evil. It's not an impossible task - I believe there's a lich who changed his ways, I know of a succubus who became neutral, and an entire city in the Maelstrom of Outsiders who rejected their assigned alignment - but it's a lot of effort for a Lemure, especially if you have important things to do. It would be FAR less uncertain for Iomedae, who is a lot more uncompromising. Her position is that if you allow evil to persist in the world, you are therefore responsible for what they do with that opportunity and obligated to deal with it if it persists. And she and Sarenrae get along fairly well. So I doubt it's anything worth Falling for.
You could tell your party members "don't believe everything you hear about Sarenites. We're not pushovers, we're just a little more thoughtful when we balance mercy with justice. And in this case, the opportunity for mercy was outweighed by the need for justice, BEFORE it killed some innocent and became a problem for more than just us."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
It was obviously not an ordinary creature of its type. Not only was it sentient but it was apparently genuinely thankful. I’d even be suspicious something like a polymorph or glamour was in play.
Also, it is a bit of a jerk move to independently start a fight that the rest of your party didn’t want to fight. Like what would you do if your party came across a wandering merchant and one player decided to attack the merchant so that you could take their stuff? Would you join in, just because they are in your party?
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
So many things don’t add up in this encounter. First of all, both types of devils are usually mindless. Neither creature is acting the way it should. So, either all is not what it seems, or the GM is making so many changes that giving any sort of advice based on the creature is not possible.
One thing that does seem strange is that the cleric of Sarenrae insists on attacking a devil but is fine with an ally summoning demons. From the fact the summoner was rooting for the devil in the second fight I have to assume that the summoner is evil. If he has no objection to an evil outsider as long as he is personally benefiting from it, but attacks others when he is not, he is a bit of a hypocrite. I realize this is probably due to not wanting to attack a party member, but if that is the case, he should not be roleplaying a character that is that against evil outsiders. While a cleric of Sarenrae could take a hardline against evil outsiders that type of character would not put up with the summoner. If you are going to put up with the summoner that aspect should be moderated. Sarenrae is the deity of redemption so playing a character who tries to redeem everyone including evil outsiders should be fine. But going hardcore on something outside the party and letting is slide inside the party is not.
Agreed - I'm seeing some party dynamics that don't exactly seem kosher.
|
It has nothing to do with monster alignment or mindlessness -- or roleplaying 'properly' -- or anything else 'in-game.'
First and foremost, this thing we all do is a social gathering with friends -- under the mask of a fun game / leisure-time. Most important is that the players at the table are having fun. And by extension, that one player isn't pissing off everyone else and curbing their fun by being a jerk and saying, 'Well I'm just doing what my PC would do.'
The DM and the group have to be on the same, or similar, Metagame understanding on how we may handle this or that Alignment situation.
If a PC is a holy-warrior-cleric of Sarenrae and wants to rip out the heart of every Evil Outsider and lightning-bolt it to smithereens, no problem. Unless,... unless that's going to ruin the fun at the table for everyone else. Every once in a while that holy-warrior-cleric of Sarenrae may have to have a Metagame excuse ready-to-go for why the PC isn't going to roleplay like a holy-warrior-cleric of Sarenrae, ripping out the heart of a particular Evil Outsider and lightning-bolt'ing it to smithereens.
If you're the player and the rest of the group is like, 'Okay, we say to the Lemure "You are Welcome" and then leave it alone and walk away,' perhaps you need to have the Metagame excuse where, like, in your head-canon Sarenrae gives you a flash of Divine inspiration and you hear her voice saying it's okay to not kill the Lemure, that Sarenrae has plans for it, like, I dunno, 'The Lemure swallowed a gold coin that I, Sarenrae, Blessed which is why the Nupperibo were imprisoning it -- and when the Nupperibo goes back to Hell I, Sarenrae, will be able to track it to its vile Master's lair and, because of my coin, I will be able to Plane-Shift my army of Planetars and Solars there and open a can of whoop-ass on the Devils. But if you kill the Lemure now and take the gold coin as loot, my long-term plan won't work. So let the Lemure go.'
Again, you're not doing this for story or roleplay reasons, you're doing it so the game, your social gathering, can move forward and everyone can have fun.
LIKEWISE, you're friends -- and especially the DM -- should be cognizant of your love of breaking out the murder-hobo roleplay against sad baby Lemures and be willing to let you have your fun of slaughtering prisoners -- or rather, your fun of roleplaying your PC in a manner you feel is appropriate.
But First and Foremost, this thing we all do is a social gathering with friends and FUN should come FIRST AND FOREMOST.
Players have a lot of leeway in how to play their characters. Most deities allow for some variation on how a character interprets their teachings. Sarenrae is actually pretty flexible in this regard; she is after all neutral good. A cleric of hers could easily take the approach of killing all evil outsiders. The paladin’s archetype Oath against Fiends does state that she is an appropriate deity for the archetype. But they could just as easily take the approach that even evil outsiders can be redeemed. There are cases where an evil outsider has been redeemed. In one case it was actually a demon lord. The empyreal lord Ragatheil is actually the son of an arch devil. Those are pretty good indication that redeeming a devil is not impossible. If the cleric is going to associate with the summoner, they should probably not take the hardline approach to evil outsiders.
It might be a good idea to have the players talk about what type of game and characters they want to have in the game. Not every concept works with every party. When a concept does not fit the party, the player should consider altering it or saving it for another campaign.
This sort of event will come up again in that AP, so you need a resolution to this.
Edit: it looks like these characters are just not compatible. I'd say that you either need a new deity or the other PCs need different attitudes and methods, none of you sound "wrong", just not compatible. So I would try to have a chill conversation with the table and see how to make what change in a way that maximizes everyone's fun.
For in-game, if your character was aware that Lemures are mindless devils (Int --) and therefore it saying thank you and giving you a reward for freeing it is strange enough then maybe you should've held off on attacking it to try to figure out why it was special.
But that's assuming someone succeeded at a Knowledge Planes check. (And assuming the GM didn't make a mistake and had a reason for it being intelligent).
But if we go wtih the assumption that everything about the Lemure seemed normal and that it was a normal devil, then no, nothing wrong with attacking it like that. (Might be a bit of an extreme reaction, but not unreasonable.)
For out of character, it depends on the group.
As long as the group, OoC, was all okay with it and no one was frustrated by it, then it all seems good. (And you said that the argument was all in-game, so presumably the group was all fine with it OoC)
But it could be seen as murder-hobo tendencies and that type of game isn't for everyone.
Friction between characters is fine, friction between players is not.
Either attacking or trying to redeem the devil would be ok with Sarenrae. The big problem I see is the character is inconsistent with his actions. His ally regularly summons up evil outsiders, but he attacks another evil outsider without hesitation. His character needs a consistent approach to dealing with evil outsiders. Considering the summoner is a party member it seems to make more sense to downplay the hostility to evil outsiders.
Personally, if I were running, I would have talked to the players about the possible conflict before the game even started. The game has already started, but figuring out how to deal with this should be something the players and GM should talk about. In games I run I usually don’t allow evil characters. This is because I really don’t like running or even playing in games with evil characters. If other people want to play a different type of game that is their prerogative but is not something that has any interest to me.
Aren't lemures mindless?Normally yes according to the bestiary. However it's not the point.
It isn't?
Because if it's not mindless then it can't be judged for 'what' it is, rather should be seen for how it acts.
The moment that creature was not mindless - then your response to it must be analyzed based on how it behaved.
From the description we have nothing to say this creature did any harm - ergo the cleric in question was acting evilly.
If we're just going to judge it based on what it is, based essentially on its ancestry - then the tiefling better make a run for it.
Judging things based on 'what' they are rather than their actions is pretty much in the definition of evil conduct...
Also given that the tiefling is a demon summoner, there might even be cause to ask about its actions, not just its ancestry. So now we're also looking at the question of double standards.
I've GMed that AP, the actions of the aforementioned demons and devils are OP's GM-fiat.
None of you are the proverbial a-holes, unless you guys took any of what transpired personally irl. Tbh, it sounds like all of you RP'ed your characters exactly as you should have.