Jump to content

Wik

Members
  • Content Count

    24
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Community Reputation

24

About Wik

  • Rank
    Mostly Harmless
  • Birthday 03/15/1982

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male
  1. I can say with all confidence that my comments here aren't based on my DM having a major failing or inability to use alignments. He knows more about D&D and Pathfinder than anyone I know. Truth be told we don't even play a full version of pathfinder because he and his dad had developed an entire game world and have their own Gods (one issue he had with 3.5 and Pathfinder was the total lack of any class needing to select a god and gaining benefits from doing so, other than simple RP value and Clerics) where one is rewarded, regardless of class or alignment, with feats, traits, special feats etc etc for worshiping a particular god. So if anything, in our campaigns, the gods and the alignments which fit into each god's sphere's is even more enhanced. But it's never been a main focal point of abuse for either us or him. I guess in the end anyone can play however they want. Some people though, I think we will all agree, allow the books and rules of whatever system they use to constrain them while others use them and even step outside of them to enhance a campaign. How that is done is up to each GM and as long as the players are willing to show up each session and work within the guidelines set down, they can't complain about it too much lol In this case from my experience I don't think I would enjoy the way your GM (or group) runs and that is just a matter of my experience and play style I've had with the same GM and cohesive group of 15 years. No disrespect meant. Each group has their own things. But that is the beauty of it all. We all enjoy RPGs but we all put our own little nuances and twists in, so there is always at least a small variable from each person. Still, I play for the fun, for the story arc and rarely does the alignment of my or the members of our group come into play in a MAJOR, campaign breaking way as you have highlighted.
  2. I guess there, regardless of use of alignment, is where we will have to agree to disagree. I'm all for alignment being used (or not if that is your preference as well) but when it's used AGAINST the players I don't much get the point. If I'm playing a murdering rapist paladin then clearly I'm not going to keep my powers. But if I kill someone in the campaign that is a perceived threat and it turns out it's a "good guy" or even another paladin than I'm not doomed to be shunned by my church and stripped of the powers given by my god to fight evil. That reeks of the DM purposely putting players in a lose lose situation just for the "excitement" of an event like changing alignment, which in this case would totally destroy a character. Unless you are doing a major diametrically opposed thing to your current alignment (under your own will with the knowledge that it breaks your moral standard), you shouldn't just instantly lose all your powers. I have a major attachment to my pally. If this Saturday he were to lose all his powers because he was put into a lose lose situation by our GM I would be PISSED. You see that as a layer of character creation. I see that as a waste of a 26th level paladin (who just became, at best a level 26 fighter, with much fewer feats and paladin based feats taken). In your mind this isn't a big deal. In my mind it's huge. I have this character and I go to play in a campaign. But my guy's alignment and my guy in general isn't EVER the main focus of the story and so shouldn't be (and isn't) the main focus of the session. Our GM does a great job of setting a plot but also coming up with scenarios as we go. If we do something to circumvent, or work around something he throws our way, he NEVER punishes us. In fact it is encouraged and rewarded (although since he has played the longest, generally speaking, he has the one up on us lol). Anyhow, I guess my whole point is, regardless of if you love the alignment system and use it, or detest it and shun it, alignment shouldn't be something actively used AGAINST you by the GM. The story, the plot, the campaign should provide plenty of excitement on it's own (and time for character development as well if you so choose) without pigeon-holing the people playing. We (or at least I) wouldn't appreciate being the target of the GM trying to trip you up every session just for potential "excitement." That could easily ruin multiple people's characters and really ISN'T fun. Long story short I guess is: we use the basic alignments given in Pathfinder but we never force them to pigeon hole each other or the group. There is enough plot and bad guys to deal with that we don't need to put each other under the microscope in every situation and reflect on our alignment to judge if our actions or outcome suits our alignment. Normally I don't have this issue but I'm finding it rather hard to get my point acrross today. I feel I am continually leaving out key points. Oh well, I guess it makes for a longer thread with more replies hahaha
  3. Well I can tell ya, we had several incidents in our group that were similar to this. One was a rogue who screwed a mage over. After he went to sleep each night she just cast disintegrate until he failed (we also play where spells can blow up your items, I believe it was something introduced in D&D 2nd ed that we continue to use as it adds another element to gear) his fort save. He lost a ton of his stuff and the mage, while still pissed, counted it as even. Another campaign we had a wizzy who wanted to Leach Field several enemies which also would have hit several group members. He decided against it but I assure you, 3 or 4 people would have instantly used their round to gut him on the spot and go back to fighting the giants. Like I said before we are all about alignment but saying "Well i'm a chaotic neutral wizzy so I don't much care what group mates I hit in my spells." is fine if that is how you want to run your toon. But the other 8 or so people run their toons as "If a "friend" nuked me they ain't much of a friend", we are at least gonna boot that character from the group and at worst gut um on the spot and get a new wiz or someone to fill that role that understands regardless of your alignment, that isn't acceptable to our group members. In the particular example of the Tiefling there were additional extentuating circumstances and I was sworn to never do it again. However, I should note that multiple times other characters saved my character - despite knowing she was a menace. Part of that was because I shared equal risk, part of that was that even as a menace she was still entertaining. However, I would have accepted a gutting because, frankly, I deserved it. The genesis of that particular menace came about because I had had several excellent characters ruined by idiot players I wanted out of the group. The kind who would screw up a whole campaign just for a cheap laugh. Having grown tired of this, and having my pleas for ousting ignored, I resolved myself to saying "well, if that's how it's going to be then I will show you all how it's done". I will create a character so troublesome and such a menace that she will be the ruin of all - and she'll still be the best character in the game, people will love her, and she'll be full of depth and nuance. So it was specifically my objective to ruin an already ruined campaign so I could re-arrange the seats with some new, quality blood. It is not something I would do under any other circumstance. Nevertheless, menace or not, she got the full fleshed out treatment. And it paid out. Well in that situation I can understand more or the "why". But in the end, as you obviously mentioned, that surpasses D&D, Pathfinder, Role Master or any RPG (and alignment!) and goes to the quality of the actual people playing. One of my friends in his 40's who has played since he was very young always talks about a group that his dad ran. The group he grew up and learned in. They would constantly screw one another over and then after the gaming session go grab coffee and food and laugh about it. They were all close friends. If you have guys who genuinely aren't getting along, or aren't really friendly towards one another outside of the campaign, that brings up a whole other issue which makes RPGs substantially less fun.
  4. Well I can tell ya, we had several incidents in our group that were similar to this. One was a rogue who screwed a mage over. After he went to sleep each night she just cast disintegrate until he failed (we also play where spells can blow up your items, I believe it was something introduced in D&D 2nd ed that we continue to use as it adds another element to gear) his fort save. He lost a ton of his stuff and the mage, while still pissed, counted it as even. Another campaign we had a wizzy who wanted to Leach Field several enemies which also would have hit several group members. He decided against it but I assure you, 3 or 4 people would have instantly used their round to gut him on the spot and go back to fighting the giants. Like I said before we are all about alignment but saying "Well i'm a chaotic neutral wizzy so I don't much care what group mates I hit in my spells." is fine if that is how you want to run your toon. But the other 8 or so people run their toons as "If a "friend" nuked me they ain't much of a friend", we are at least gonna boot that character from the group and at worst gut um on the spot and get a new wiz or someone to fill that role that understands regardless of your alignment, that isn't acceptable to our group members.
  5. I agree for the most part but my only issue with your point is the concept that some GMs would go out of their way to screw a player over because he is a pally. The whole "trying to break" you thing is a major turn off, for me personally. When my group of 15+ years runs a campaign we run that campaign, that story. It has a "timeline" and ALL the people in it have daily things that occur. For the GM to purposely try to screw a party member because of class/alignment, I would get discouraged. I love playing D&D and Pathfinder because of the great adventures and stories and plots we go through. My highest level character and main character is a pally. It would have been MUCH less enjoyable for me and anyone else with a pally if the GM was constantly trying to screw us over from being a pally.
  6. Hahahha ran into this sooooo much as a low lvl pally. Me: "I detect evil through the door." GM: "Ok. You don't detect anything." Me: "I open the door." GM: "ok guys lets go to initiative" Me: "............" Me: "WTF you said I didn't detect anything." GM: "No...I said you didn't detect EVIL." Me: "Ok so how can that bad guy be there?" GM: "Well, maybe he isn't evil...." Me: "......................." Me: "I go on 3..........." hahahahaha oh how legitimately leveling a pally almost 27 levels teaches you things.
  7. Like wise, as a LG character (or pally) you shouldn't be bound to fight an evil person or monster simply based on it being evil, if you are aware that they can't be defeated in the current situation (I.E. a deamon lord of considerable power against a lvl 5 pally). If you play LG as forcing you to fight that deamon, simply because your a pally, I feel that is way overdoing it. Again, lawful good, vs lawful stupid.
  8. Thanks! I had a dilemma with the original sword which I liked but wasn't a huge fan of the flames (just in my pally's case not from an ascetic point of view). I still think I could have thought of something to spruce the sword up more, but I don't know exactly what we could have done so we just went with a normal looking weapon. Anyhow, glad you like.
  9. I found it interesting that the author considered keeping to the lawful good alignment to be boring and a limitation of player creativity. I happen not to agree, but I wonder how common the attitude is. I'll start with an admission that the alignment system is artificial and a little silly, a relic of Gary Gygax's infatuation with the work of Michael Moorcock and his whole law and chaos thing. But it is part of the rules, and it can be fun and challenging to take it up. I've played with lots of people over the years, and most of us have gotten as much entertainment out of the alignment system as any other aspect of D&D rules. We've played characters of all alignments, and I've seen my friends be inspired in all sorts of interesting ways by trying to act in accord with them. A paladin, to take one example, could be priggish, or boisterous, or slightly off-key and carrying a book of etiquette for every occasion, all while faithfully adhering to the lawful good alignment. He or she could be stern, merry, contemplative, ambitious, humble or pushy, all the while promoting justice and questy stuff the way the rulebooks say paladins should. Sometimes they don't quite make it. I'll just put in a mention here of poor Dudley Didwrong, the post-mortal not-quite paladin from a friend's campaign. He tried, the poor dope. My thesis is that playing to alignment rather than stifling individuality and creativity can be liberating and open up new possibilities in roleplaying. What are other people's opinions? I'll preface this by saying that I have ran my pally since D&D 3.0 when I really started getting into the game. My group is pretty combat heavy but the research/clues/context/rp that we do take up is very in depth, just usually for shorter periods, or one long drawn out period prior to heading out to adventure. As I leveled my pally I learned that many time, because of your alignment you become a spokesmen of the group by default (along with other reasons but I won't delve into that). I had two friends who had leveled pally's before me as well so I had some guidance and ideas on how I could make him and shape him. We now run Pathfinder but it's the same alignment system. One thing they always told me as I leveled up was that I was Lawful Good. Not Lawful Stupid. There is a line. Another concept that we had developed over years (and as random group mates came and went) was that if someone in the group was a total D-bag (in character, of course) then they would lose "brownie" points with most if not all members. If it got bad enough (nuking group mates, stealing loot, deceiving the party for personal gain etc etc) we would ask the question "Why are we even grouping with you?" Not you as in our RL friend but you as in the character you felt was needed to make and drive the group crazy with. The answer we came up with is: we wouldn't. In one major campaign we ran one of the Lawful Good Church's hired us to do work for them. So, by default, my pally was a "leader" of the group as I was a trusted liaison between the group and the church as it was the deity I worshiped. That along with the fact that I was the only LG person in group made me a bit of a moral compass. But we didn't have any chaotic neutral members either (we don't allow evil characters to be played in "good" campaigns because the question of then "WHY" would we be with this person always outweighed the need we would have for that specific skill set). Anyhow, we had quite the campaign, there was some breaking and entering, some that I was not made aware of, some that I was eventually let in on because of evidence against certain NPCs. Anyhow, to my point just because you are LG doesn't mean your an idiot or are naive. I do have a moral code and as we have leveled our characters the ones who have ran with my pally know what he allows and what he expects. In the end if a Chaotic Neutral rogue was bound and determined to break that code it would either come to blows or that person would be excommunicated from being in the group with my pally. And some will say "Well why wouldn't your pally be excommunicated instead of the rogue" and the answer is that because, by and large, most characters are going to be good or lawful of some type. If a CN rogue or fighter or wizzy continually screwed the group for their own personal gain, we would just simply find the services of someone else not of that alignment with a matching skill set. I don't know if this answers the question correctly, but it's just always been my group's thought process the past 15+ years of playing. I love my pally and think the class is great fun. I think many times people who play pally's constrict themselves into the LG mindset of lawful stupid.
  10. Hey all. I promised an update on the situation and while i've been sick and working a ton I wanted to drop a few pics off at least. I had purchased 3 figs, but my main focus was on my pally fig (Also got a dwarf wiz and a dwarf barbarian). Here are a couple pics of how the pally turned out. I had always envisioned him in his house colors of a cream or off-white and light blue. The careful eye (and hand!) along with a vast amount of tutelage from a friend we ended up with a slight modification and this final paint job. My though going in was (an I mean no disprect to anyone who is featured here or has done this for their own figs, it's just MY thing) I didn't want everything to match. I hate how so many figs have perfectly matching armor, shield, even sword (or weapon) all conveniently match to a T. I hate that! So not alot of flare here, but thats how I wanted it. how to screenshot on windows 7
  11. Jack thanks for the input. I had kinda assumed as you mentioned that Finari's sword was sculpted right into the fig. Sad :( I appreciate the insight on how to get around that but I did end up ordering some figs to get started. I can always go back if I need/want to and do what you suggested. But I have my first order in (Pally fig, dwarf wiz, Dwarf Barbarian and the weapon sprue) and hopefully it will ship tomorrow or the next day!!!! Ill keep everyone posted on how things go on this little project!
  12. Ya, I had stumbeled across those but was not sure that I would have the skill or ability to get the sword of fthe model. Also, the condition of teh sword after I seperated it from the model is a concern lol
  13. Ya, I kinda figured but was hoping for confirmation. I very much appreciate you confirming and shattering my dreams, thanks! :p hahaha
  14. Thats actually pretty brilliant hahaha I guess the issue I really have is I see pros and cons to all the figs I have in mind....so I don't know if what I want to do, is do-able lol. Can anyone clarify, would this sword from Finari 54 MM model be usable on say Almaran, Drexel, or any of the dozen other I mentioned previously? lol I really love that sword design but knowing that it came from a larger model....
  15. Hilarious! A couple of my friends used to own a game shop that carried reaper and so they have minis and cases for storage (they are no longer in biz) but sadly I do not....I honestly need more than you (but less than 20 :p hahaha). I just wanted the pally 1st as it's my main character and one I am playing in our current campaign. I also need a dwarven wiz and Dwarven Barbarian. I have not nearly done the research on them as I have the pally but I have already found sveral I like....but then i'm gonna end up having around 20.....for ever character, and no where to store them hahaha
×
×
  • Create New...