| T O P I C R E V I E W |
| Na-Gang |
Posted - 30 Mar 2007 : 13:20:35
OK. I'm a bit stuck.
I'm playing a CG Barbarian who has several divine connections and feats so he's an all-round good guy. The party has found itself in a drow city, they're surrounded by slaves of all races being bought, sold, and mistreated. There are demons and devils walking the streets and evil all around.
How the hell is he supposed to function there? One of my big points in playing the character was his opposition to slavery and being a do-gooder hero, blessed by the gods (of good). He's brave to the point of being foolhardy but I don't want to ruin it for the other players by having him draw them into a fight against the whole city that they obviously can't win. Besides, a large proportion of the group are neutral and aren't all that bothered.
How do I justify him not flying off the handle to defend the first slave he sees being mistreated? He's a doer not a thinker. |
| 9 L A T E S T R E P L I E S (Newest First) |
| Na-Gang |
Posted - 02 Apr 2007 : 13:22:29
Thanks guys.
We had a session yesterday. We're in the city 'for the greater good' Lolth (or her priestesses) has trapped a city on the surface in a bubble of impenetrable blackness and we don't know why or what has happened inside. The clues led to the Fane of Lolth in this city, we have help from certain members of the drow community who are not evil (my character is a holy barbarian - with an adapted prestige class from the book of exalted deeds - divine grace, a few divine spells, detect evil, bunch of other stuff). However, he has refused all but the barest help from these people, does not engage with them, and is often downright rude since they are part of this society - none have expressed any desire to change their society or that slavery etc. are wrong. He's becoming more standoffish from his comrades the longer they stay in the city and has been locking himself away alone in his room whenever he's not needed - whilst everyone else goes and parties with the drow courtesans, much to his displeasure.
Coupled with the effects of the Lolth-artifact in his possession he is becoming more paranoid and secretive and has noticed small but coarse dark hairs on the palm of his hand...
So to save the city on the surface he must allow this city of slavery and evil to endure until he can be assured of successfully freeing at least some of the slaves. |
| Asgetrion |
Posted - 02 Apr 2007 : 01:08:05
Na-Gang,
I agree with everyone here. Lemernis especially said about everything that I wanted to say about this subject. This is a theme that our DM likes to throw at our characters, too. I must admit that I personally love it when my character is faced with moral choices and their consequences that are linked to his ideals, goals or values. What am I willing to endure or sacrifice to achieve a long-term goal? Is it okay, if my enemies kill my sister/brother/mother/father to avenge or discourage my actions, or should I stop being a heroic adventurer so that *my* family will live? Is it okay to deal with evil NPCs, or use “evil” or questionable methods (i.e. torture, mind-reaming, charming, poison etc.) in the name of “Greater Good”? Should I just stand by and watch, as these Drow are torturing and killing helpless slaves, if I know that some day I might return as a powerful warlord to raze this city and end this madness? Or should I save just *this* family of slaves and flee from the city with them?
It feels especially rewarding when I (as a person) have a completely different opinion (from my character’s opinion) on how a particular dilemma or conflict should be resolved. This, I think, is one of the finest and most rewarding aspects of roleplaying.
However, only *you* have the final word on how your character feels about and reacts in all circumstances. Your character might just "suck it up", and harbor some thoughts and hope of righting all wrongs as soon as he is able to ("I will return with an army one day!"). If you took any direct action, your DM might lash out at you for "arrogance", saying that "Hey, you knew that you'd be foolish to try anything in a drow city! Shut up and roll a new character!". On the other hand, a devious DM might let you get away with it, while later on showing you the consequences of your actions.
If I were your DM, and you decided to free some slaves, I'd go with it *if* you had a good plan and executed it succesfully. One possibility might be that when you returned to the city, there might have been a desperate slave revolt (inspired by your bold actions as a rumour had circulated of a single brave soul who had liberated some slaves). Now, most of the slaves have been put to sword, and drow raiding parties have traveled to the Surface in search of more slaves... maybe even to your character's home village 
I will give here some examples from our longest running campaign, which has featured some tough moral choices on our characters' part.
Several years ago our adventurers were contacted by Shoon VII (whose minions and goals they had opposed many times). This vile demilich proposed a deal: he'd deliver one of our elusive, high-level foes into our hands if we killed a certain Banite heretic for him. Now, this foe was none other than Priamon "Frostrune" Rakesk, who had caused a lot of misery in that campaign... his life for the life of another evil being - seemed like a simple choice, right? (although none of our characters actually liked the idea of working as assassins for Shoon VII). Well, this "Banite heretic" turned out to be an avatar of Iyachtu Xvim, and this particular avatar was trying to oppose the Sythisillian hordes (in our campaign serving the causes of both Shoon and Cyric) and their allies. We finally managed to kill the avatar, and you can guess how we felt when we found out that we had slain a potential divine ally (although this idea was also resisted by most of the characters) whose presence and actions might have prevented many tragedies taking place during the Horde’s invasion. Shoon *did* deliver a weakened Priamon (whom we killed) into our hands, but not his phylactery, which we haven't found to this day (and thus, Priamon keeps popping up in the campaign every now and then ;)
Another example, which reminds me of your situation: we visited Skullport for the first time with our characters. Our paladin (of Helm) was horrified at he saw there, and when we eventually met a group of drow slave traders and chained slaves, he had had enough. Drawing his Holy Avenger he stepped to block the way, and unsurprisingly, the whole party was soon enough involved in a furious melee. We failed to free the slaves, and had to retreat and hide to lick our wounds (those were pretty tough slave traders ;). Some of the characters had even died, and had to resurrected. Still, no one blamed the paladin, although the more pragmatic (neutral) characters had a long discussion with him about the benefits of “greater good” in the long run…
Speaking of “Greater Good”: Our characters had made enemies of some very powerful vampires in Undermountain. One of them started to haunt my nobleman character’s family mansion, slaying one or two servants/guards at a time. Each time our characters returned to Waterdeep, servants would beg for help, as a body or two had turned up during the night, clutching a mocking note that dared my fighter to come after the vampire. What should I do, when our characters were caught up in the events of the Age of Worms (Age of Phaerimm in our campaign ;) and every *hour* counted in our race to stop the Realmsdoom? He gave them some magic weapons to defend themselves, vowing to stop this vampire’s rampage, as soon as we had time for that. He just had to harden his heart and personal feelings, for surely the lives of a few servants or guards - even though he had known many of them since childhood - would weigh less in the scheme of things than the fate of the whole world? However, if this vampire decides to kill his sister, or his mother… what then? Where do I draw the line?
My final example is about the afore-mentioned paladin of Helm, who is a son of a modest Waterdhavian fisherman (and also the leader of our adventuring company). We had been fighting the Sythisillian Horde in Amn for some in the campaign (and quite successfully, I must say). One night, his father was captured by the ogre-mage Sythillis herself (who is a female in our campaign) whom actually teleported into his room while holding a sword to his father’s throat. Next morning the paladin came to tell my character all about this unpleasant encounter. My fighter said: “You knew that it just had to happen, some day. We have too many enemies, now.” He responded: “How can you be so callous about it - she was holding my father’s life in her hands! My own father! I just couldn’t let it happen, so I took a sacred vow on Helm’s holy name that we would cease all hostile actions against her and her forces, and she would spare my father’s life…”. My fighter became livid with rage: “How can you claim that your father’s life is more valuable than those of all the weak and the innocent here in Amn? Will you betray the oaths you took when you joined Helm’s faith?”. The paladin shook his head sadly: “No – you don’t understand. How can I protect others, if I cannot protect my own family? How can I claim to be a Holy Warrior, or even a human being, if I sacrifice their lives in cold blood? It would stain my soul forever, and I draw the line here!” I, as a player, thought that this was a brilliant point and display of roleplaying, although my character wanted to strangle him (and almost did so  ) |
| Kentinal |
Posted - 01 Apr 2007 : 20:49:50
quote:
Originally posted by Na-Gang
Ulf (my character) has never been to a place like this before. He's concerned that his colleagues, and more importantly his gods and ancestors, might consider his decision not to act as a display of cowardice (he's all about bravery and strength and freedom).
In part I believe your character is more Lawful then you want to admit.
A Lawful person worries about their honor and what ansestors think about actions, after all they are dead and do not think. In my view and understanding a CG character would be at ease stabing an Evil character in the back to stop the evil. It is not quite the ends justifies the means, because there is the limitation of not committing an Evil act (generally killing inocents to achieve an over all desired result), but in many ways there are simalarities. The rules do not matter (Law does not matter) as long as Evil is defeated.
There clearly can be an element of pride, a character of any alignment can have this problem, and/or boasting rights. A CG character has no duty to free every slave seen, that tends to be more a task of Paladins (and even some of them acept the reality of personal combat can not free all slaves, some do not want to be free).
Clearly your character is in the wrong place based on your view of how he should react to the local environment and as far as RP goes should seek to end the location as soon as posible. If a quick quest that suceeds you can complete, but if the mission is weeks or months it appears to me he would advise the others in the party to withdraw until they could return in greater force to right the wrongs. |
| Purple Dragon Knight |
Posted - 01 Apr 2007 : 20:29:34
My CN gnome bard is currently in the City of Dis (second layer of Hell) and is in the same boat. Every fiber of his being want to get out of there, and he can't stand the constant screams of agony coming from the enslaved lemures, mortals, planars, the punished ones, etc.
He had the extreme luck of coming across an erinyes with a Faerunian mortal slave (a dalesman farmer), and bought the slave off her. |
| Lemernis |
Posted - 01 Apr 2007 : 14:01:29
He can be opposed to slavery (and evil in general) in terms of feelings and attitude, and therein remain true to alignment. But as others have pointed out, his behavior has to adapt the the practical realities he's facing--i.e., he can't help anyone by throwing his life away in some foolish outburst.
I think the real question is what justifies him remaining in the party under these circumstances. Is there some end that is served by being in theat city that could be rationalized as ultimately (or hopefully) 'good'? What sort of bonds has he established with the rest of the party that might justify him holding his nose and sticking around for this adventure in an evil city. You may want to clarify where he falls on the 'idealism vs. realism' continuum. If he's extremely idealistic--i.e., noble principles trump all else--he'd probably leave the party. If he's a realist--i.e., accepts that there's often unintended but unavoidable negative consequences to many of life's toughest decisions--he'd be more likely to stick around. |
| Rinonalyrna Fathomlin |
Posted - 01 Apr 2007 : 00:29:25
quote:
Originally posted by Na-Gang
Ulf (my character) has never been to a place like this before. He's concerned that his colleagues, and more importantly his gods and ancestors, might consider his decision not to act as a display of cowardice (he's all about bravery and strength and freedom).
It's not cowardice, it's just intelligence. Throwing one's life away would be an act of stupidity...and he should also consider that "lashing out" would endanger his companions as well as himself. If I were in that party, I'd much rather have companions who are cowards than idiots who would risk my life and the lives of everyone else in the group over an idealogical point. |
| Na-Gang |
Posted - 30 Mar 2007 : 16:39:52
Ulf (my character) has never been to a place like this before. He's concerned that his colleagues, and more importantly his gods and ancestors, might consider his decision not to act as a display of cowardice (he's all about bravery and strength and freedom).
He's not stupid and would understand that he couldn't win in an open battle, and that he cannot succeed with stealth and subterfuge, he's tearing himself apart about what to do.
Additionally he's got a crazy artifact dedicated to Lolth that's making him carry it around and hide it from his colleagues because it's made him think only he is strong enough to carry it, and they would fall to its power. I might actually use that as his reasons for not starting a fight - he doesn't want the Lolth-thing to fall into anyone else's hands should he die, and as unthinkable as that is to him in his bravery and strength and Rah! the power of Lolth's artifact over him is probably stronger. I'll speak to my DM about that.
Thanks guys. |
| KnightErrantJR |
Posted - 30 Mar 2007 : 14:08:05
If you read the second book of the Erevis Cale book, there is a really good part that deals with characters in Skullport and how they react to the slaves and the general oppressive nature of the place. I'd definately recommend it, as its very much the same situation you find yourselves in.
My players ended up traveling with Shadovar diplomats into Zhentil Keep (long story), but they all desperately wanted to cut loose on both the Shadovar and the Zhents. The cleric of Helm was upset with the very idea that he would have to travel with a cleric of Shar, and all of the group was upset with the slave markets, etc.
When they were alone, they decided that they just wanted to get out of the city alive, and that this experience would just galvanize them toward keeping either the Zhents or the Shadovar from expanding their territories, and on top of that, they found out about a plan to slaughter some Bedine to ease the Zhent's trade caravans, so when they finally got away from Zhentil Keep, they headed out to Anauroch to warn the tribes.
The point was that they realized a party of adventurers isn't going to "fix" Zhentil Keep by itself, nor would they be able to deal with the Shadovar by themselves, but they could make a difference to the Bedine . . . plus the NG rogue/druid purchased a slave child to take them out and find them a new home outside of Zhentil Keep. |
| Kaladorm |
Posted - 30 Mar 2007 : 13:42:04
Being good or evil does not always mean doing the clear right or clear wrong thing. He may be aching to help out but even least intelligent barbarian will suerly realise that taking on a whole city can ahve no good outcomes.
Sometimes a good character will just have to consider the greater good.
Also consider his companions, how well do they know him? If they know that he's likely to go mad at the first slave he sees, then they should be restraining him and reminding him that its a really bad idea. If it happens that he starts to get angry and trying to draw a fight, it shouldn't phase his companions to knock him unconscious or restrain him somehow if it jeapordises the whole party |
|
|
