Ultra-geeky D&D 3.5 question: What would you do?

The Game Room
1

I have a Forgotten Realms Cleric of Tyr 6/Church Inquisitor 5 that started at level 3 and have been playing in the same adventure for two years next month. Originally his alignment was LN, but after seeing the horror and destruction wrought by a malebranche and its droogs, he learned that law and order can be abused and perverted without moral guidance, thus subsequently shifting his alignment to LG.

Here’s where my dilemma comes into play: His party and what he considers his closest friends consist of a Drunken Master, a Sorcerer, a Rogue/Swashbuckler/Outlaw, and a pure Rogue. Initially, our first, very charismatic Sorcerer acted as a second moral compass to the group. However, he left to go to the land of the Fey so that he could learn a forgotten ancient language in a few months that would normally take years upon years.

Our second Sorcerer (played by the same guy) is a little more willing to bend morals and ethics if he thinks the ends will justify the means. That leaves me, the sole keeper of law in the party, to rein in the rest of the guys when they want to smash heads and break dudes out of jail instead of following due process. I also feel like I’m taking too much advantage of my high position in the church and using it as a tool instead of serving it.

Anyway, these guys have put me in increasingly difficult situations that I need to explain my way out of to keep from getting arrested and/or falling from Tyr. Right now, the Purple Dragons in Suzail are watching me and my associations extremely closely. We already had one discussion where I told the party that if they put me in that kind of situation again (they attacked a bar full of Purple Dragons), then I’m gone.

Sky (my character) has already pissed Tyr off once and temporarily lost all spells over 3rd level. He has since atoned, but recently had a dream where he was on one side of a pair of scales and his body was causing the scales to shift way too far in one direction. Upon communing with Tyr, he confirmed that the Big Man was indeed pretty upset with him.

Roleplaying-wise, what would you do? If I wanted to roleplay to the hilt, I would tell my buddies, “Listen, I’m about to go too far down a road that I don’t want to go down,” retire in the church, and roll a new character. However, I really, really like this character and the party would pretty much be toast without a dedicated healer.

Thoughts? Sorry for the length.

2

Start wacking heads.

Next time they attack the purple dragons (barney!) attack them. Let them get thrown in jail (but not killed) and use your good graces with the temple to let them off minus some gold, or maybe a couple of finger for a fine.

Tell them next time you won’t be using the flat of your sword, and there ain’t gonna be anyone riding to their rescue from the hangman.

It’s called tough love.

You’ll need a DM that isn’t going to penalize the good guy in the party though for being good.

3

You didn’t actually clarify-- I presume all the other party members are chaotic? Their alignment is a lot more relevant in this situation than their classes.

But this is really something that needs to be discussed out-of-character with the other players, including the DM. Assuming the others are all good, you might be able to resolve the issue by just sticking to the wilderness and dungeons, where the ethical axis of the alignment chart is less relevant: You can all agree on kicking devil butt. But if it does continue to be an issue, then your character really would be justified in leaving the party. If you were tired of playing that character, that might be a convenient excuse, but if you like playing him, that’s an out-of-character issue, and so should be resolved out-of-character.

4

I don’t think there’s a problem with having a LG PC in the party you describe (hey, a Lawful Good guy can hang out with tax collectors and prostitutes, right?), but it seems that your DM has a problem with a cleric of Tyr associating with the other PCs. So I’m not sure what you can tell the other PCs other than “Tyr doesn’t like the way you’ve been acting, so I might have to leave you”. Either they shape up, or you ship out.

5

Moved Cafe Society --> the Game Room.

6

You’re the only healer, right?

Problem solved.

“What’s that? You want a Cure Serious? Guess you should have thought of that before you took a swing at that paladin, huh?”

7

Drunken Master: LN (though bordering on Chaotic)
Sorcerer: CG (I think)
Rogue/Swashbuckler/Outlaw: CG
Rogue: CG

The only reason the Drunken Master hasn’t been penalized is because he’s been conveniently doing things for us on the sly separately from the party. He hasn’t been in a situation yet where he’s picking fights with the po-pos. Also, I think the DM has been a little harder on me than the Drunken Master because I’m supposed to be a “shining bastion of law and order.”

I would love to do this, but Blackjack (the Rogue/Swashbuckler/Outlaw) has a rap sheet a mile long (although there are mitigating circumstances to his crimes). If he got caught, he’d never see the light of day again. I’m sure Tyr is pretty unhappy with me in part because I’m harboring a known fugitive.

8

Then he ought to be trying to keep the party out of fights with the cops.

His player is playing him in an irrational way–being chaotic is not the same as being stupid–and thereby compromising your roleplaying. Let him take the consequences. I know, you don’t want to piss off the player by “getting his character in trouble”, but it’s not your responsibility as a player to make it all work out. The DM and your chaotic teammates are creating these situations between them, and it’s putting an unfair burden on you. Play your character as you see fit, and let the DM worry about getting the others out of the hole, if necessary. If the DM wants to keep the characters in the game after they’re arrested, there are countless ways he can script it.

9

Blackjack’s entire personality can be summed up as such: “You’ll never take me alive, fuckers!”

Nevertheless, you are correct. I should have a talk with Blackjack’s player. Being chaotic does not mean being stupid, and it makes no logical sense to fight instead of run when caught. Crazy, too, since his player has been playing D&D and other RPG’s a decade or more longer than I have.

I shouldn’t be bearing the burden of protecting my party from the consequences of their bad behavior, it’s true.

10

I’m sure the authorities can find a mutually-satisfactory way of accommodating such an attitude.

It sounds to me like there’s some issues with the DM, too, though. He’s basically giving you the choice between falling from grace, or going PvP, or giving up your character. None of those is conducive to a fun time. I think you need to talk with the DM to find out what he’s trying to get you to do, and why.

11

Some people make throwaway characters when they’ve been playing for a long time–characters with weird concept builds, suicidal roleplaying traits, and other oddities. They know it’s not optimal; they just want to see what happens. It’s possible that Blackjack’s player expects him to die or get jailed for life, and is just seeing how far he can push the character before that happens. If so, it’s a valid way to play, but it’s also something he really should have been upfront with the other players about.

On the other hand, some people never really seem to learn.

12

Another thing to bear in mind:

You’re playing 3.0/3.5. Not 2nd Ed.

Lawful does not mean adhering to laws in 3rd Ed. It means adhering to an inner code and following that code even when it is easier not to. Monks must be lawful, because they strive for purity of themselves (hence why they become celestial beings eventually). Paladins must be lawful because they follow honor above all things. Paladins should not lie unless they have a very good reason to, and when they give their word to accomplish a task, they are supposed to follow it. (Technically any lawful entity, even lawful evil, that goes back on an agreed upon deal or their word is risking an alignment deviation.)

Granted, lawful in 3rd usually entails following the legal code of a land, because it helps maintain order, and an ordered society makes it far easier to adhere to an internal compass, but if you are actively getting penalized by your GM for breaking the law when it serves the greater purpose for you to do so, your GM is stuck in the 2.0 mindset.

One reason they relaxed the “lawful” thing for 3.0 is because a lot of LG characters would find themselves in situations where breaking a law served the greater good, even when that law was itself not a bad law. (In 2.0, Paladins could break unjust or evil laws, but that was it, anything else risked losing their powers. A lot of GMs rule 0’ed that if it made justifiable sense for a Paladin to ignore a law, he could.)

13

Unfortunately, I’ve noticed a strong negative correlation between the groups of “People who care about their characters” and “People who do insane stupid thing.” Those most likely to opt for the second don’t really care if the toon gets smacked down for it.

That said, I’d opt for an in-character discussion first. Crazy or not, they can rpobably be reasoned with. And setriously, if a party of Faerunian adventurers of any alignment can’t find plenty to do without pissing off the forces of order, they’ve got some issues. (K, they might prefer to piss off said forces, but that’s a different ball of wax and a whole different campaign.)

14

As a cleric he still has to abide by the laws and dogma of his god in order to keep his powers.

15

True. But how anal is Tyr really, and how anal is Tyr as being played by the GM. Some gods really due require strict adherence to the laws of the land, but if the god isn’t like that, there’s no reason for the clerics to have to be like that.

(I honestly don’t know since I never did much FR.)

16

Actually, Tyr is exactly that way. In a good or lawful society, clerics are expected to keep the local laws, although they’re certainly encouraged to work to change those they feel are unjust. In Cormyr? Hell no, that cleric better shape up.

17

Your character isn’t just a healer with Tyr-relevant domain powers. He’s a living mouthpiece for a god. Act like it, playa!

18

Týr…sniff :frowning:

19

Remember, kid; heroes get remembered, but legends never die.

20

Here’s what I wrote to my DM: