I mean, we just started and we're just getting into it, but this came out of the blue and blind sided me. It's too early to say whether the game is good or not. If it doesn't work out, I wouldn't mind going online if that's the only other option, I've just never done it online so I'm not familiar with how that's done, or how to get in.
Playing online is fairly straight forward you generally need 3 things (though some services can provide more than 1 and they are not all compulsorary)
A means of communication: There are text based games but this is usually done by voice often using discord or something similar
A means of creating a character sheet and rolling dice. The DM will probably want access to your character sheet and while you can oll physical dice and tell people what you got you don't want them to think you are cheating if you get 3 crits on the row. DnD Beyond is great for this
A virtual table top, this is used to show maps you can move avatars around, most have there own mwthids of character creation but Beyond 20 is a third party system that allows you to roll from your DnD beyond sheet directly into a table top and I prefer that. It isn't required to have a VTT you can play theatre of the mind. Think of the difference as playing face to face with and without minis and paper maps. Probably the most well know is roll 20
As far as finding a group there is a page on the forum here as well as on most the the VTT sites. Sometimes the DM will charge (it is up to you if you are willing to pay for a campaign but DMs that don't charge generally have more applications than they can accept so it might take a few attempts ot find a game), the DM may have master tier subscriptions giving you access to all the content they have bought.
As well as campaigns there are quite a few discord servers set up for playing one shots in various ways. Sometimes they also have campaigns and one shots, this can be a good way to find out you like the DMs style with one-shots before committing to a campaign.
I agree with yurei. This seems more like an issue with the table dynamics than anything in character. you were expecting a different kind of game than they are playing. You can either adjust your character to more go along with the way the party works (play it like your character had a revelation that evil is more fun), talk to them about it out of character and see if they’ll dial it back a bit (say something like, you missed the session 0 kind of thing and you’d like a quick rundown of expectations and how the party works, so you can know what you’re getting yourself into), or leave the group.
It sounds like a perfectly reasonable conflict to have in character. Sounds like the warlock is chaotic evil or chaotic neutral. You say your character is neutral good, but I could see your attitudes fitting with any combination of neutral / lawful neutral / good. In any case, there are plenty of ways to conflict with chaotic evil. Parties can hold together that have conflicting alignments. You just have to set boundaries as characters, and maybe as players. For example, maybe you can say,
"If you don't like the way I negotiate, you talk to the goblins. Oh? You can't? Then maybe follow my lead when we deal with them."
Now, if things seem to be sliding in the wrong direction in character, step out of character, and establish that you're not personally upset, you're just playing how your character would react.
If you can't find a resolution in character that you think is believable for your character, or you as a player just aren't having fun, then discuss with the DM how you can best resolve the situation with minimal disruption to the game. Maybe you want to drop out of the game. Maybe you want to create a new character that is not a goblinoid or is not good. Either way, either your character can PVP (if the DM is okay with it) and get killed, run away from the party, or become an NPC controlled by the DM (if you're okay with it).
The classic, old school line of thought was that all creatures who were Evil were irredeemably so. Killing them was a good thing, it was necessary because otherwise the entire world would be overrun with monsters like; goblins, hobgoblins, and bugbears. So take a look at the Warlock again. How do they behave? They got all kinds of upset because someone else swore an oath and then interfered when it was time to break it. They see themselves as only doing what has to be done... Yep. Lawful Good. They were playing an "Anti-Hero", someone who does what they have to, and is willing to use the tools of evil against a greater evil.
Way back when Paladins were required to be Lawful Good, and lost their powers when they were not, a lot of those old school DMs like to mess with Paladins by presenting them with situations to test their morals against their ethics. It's called "Situational Morality" and applies to people who have moved into an area where there's a different culture. They get what is called "Culture Shock". The rules have changed, sometimes in horrifying ways, and they don't know what to do. Maybe the OP was in fact playing a Paladin, because their behavior is very much like the old school Lawful Good Paladin.
They joined a game, they experienced culture shock, and they felt betrayed.
"If you ever break a promise I make again, I will eat your heart while you watch. If you have a problem with me making a promise, say it at the time. You ever undercut my word again and one of us will die!"
I love this line.
Following the OC discussion, you will need to determine if you (and your character) can abide running around with a group of murderhobos or if he has some sense of morality that will constantly grate on your nerves.
I think I can adapt my playstyle, the only issue is I don't like the idea of PVP issues like this where I have to debate both IC and OOC on how to act so as not to lose the character or be booted from the group, that's not fun for me. I can play my character as disapproving of the murderhobing, but not going to stop them because bugbears usually put heads on pikes. As long as their doing it to people who attack them, and not slaughtering innocents he can go along with it, he may give a disapproving look when they are being unnecessarily brutal, but he's not going to say anything or get in their way.
I believe when I asked him about his alignment before we started, he either said chaotic good or chaotic neutral. When I asked in shock why he had done what he did, he said 'My character doesn't like promises being made for him'. Given what's been said, he's actually playing chaotic evil, he just wants to do what he wants. That and he's salty the Bugbear spoke as a representative of the party. With the advise here I can definitely call him out on his character's racism and have a way forward without my character becoming the butt of abuse for the party, my only concern is this sparks a PVP PK scenario. I want to talk to the DM beforehand and tell him my concern, but I'm hoping this can be resolved and we get back to playing with the understanding that the characters shouldn't be backstabbing each other because "HEY I"M CHAOTIC!!!".
"My character doesn't like promises being made for him" You are absolutely right, any time someone says "My character would" they are meta-gaming. They don't want to say what they would do, they want their character to be able to think for them. That's the opposite of role-playing, that's Rule Playing.
"My character doesn't like promises being made for him" You are absolutely right, any time someone says "My character would" they are meta-gaming. They don't want to say what they would do, they want their character to be able to think for them. That's the opposite of role-playing, that's Rule Playing.
What? This makes no sense...
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I believe when I asked him about his alignment before we started, he either said chaotic good or chaotic neutral. When I asked in shock why he had done what he did, he said 'My character doesn't like promises being made for him'. Given what's been said, he's actually playing chaotic evil, he just wants to do what he wants. That and he's salty the Bugbear spoke as a representative of the party. With the advise here I can definitely call him out on his character's racism and have a way forward without my character becoming the butt of abuse for the party, my only concern is this sparks a PVP PK scenario. I want to talk to the DM beforehand and tell him my concern, but I'm hoping this can be resolved and we get back to playing with the understanding that the characters shouldn't be backstabbing each other because "HEY I"M CHAOTIC!!!".
"I don't like promises being made for me," is perfectly compatible with any chaotic alignment. A chaotic good character will definitely break a promise if fulfilling it would be evil. Killing an enemy that's not a threat isn't very good, but it's definitely combatible with chaotic neutral. It could even be compatible with chaotic good if the character reasons that the goblin will terrorize more people if they set it free.
However, "It's what my character would do," doesn't cover all sins. The warlock player is bordering on chaotic annoying. There are those players who taunt the enemy while you're trying to be stealthy or stab the NPC you're negotiating with because, "It's what my character would do. I'm chaotic." There is a point where a character can be too chaotic to be a team player on an adventuring party, and what the other characters in the party would do is kick him to the curb. It doesn't seem like that's the case in this game, though, as the other players seem pretty tolerant of chaos.
"My character doesn't like promises being made for him" You are absolutely right, any time someone says "My character would" they are meta-gaming. They don't want to say what they would do, they want their character to be able to think for them. That's the opposite of role-playing, that's Rule Playing.
What? This makes no sense...
I'm going to go ahead and guess he is talking about "The Wangrod Defense", when you insist you must play your character a certain way because "it's what my character would do, I have no choice".
To the OP, everything up to this point sounds so convoluted that I can hardly see how playing with this group will be fun for you. With my friends, we've all made murderhobos to run in a diabolic campaign but, even these characters had group cohesion and shared goals.
"My character doesn't like promises being made for him" You are absolutely right, any time someone says "My character would" they are meta-gaming. They don't want to say what they would do, they want their character to be able to think for them. That's the opposite of role-playing, that's Rule Playing.
What? This makes no sense...
I'm going to go ahead and guess he is talking about "The Wangrod Defense", when you insist you must play your character a certain way because "it's what my character would do, I have no choice".
To the OP, everything up to this point sounds so convoluted that I can hardly see how playing with this group will be fun for you. With my friends, we've all made murderhobos to run in a diabolic campaign but, even these characters had group cohesion and shared goals.
Once again, I don't seem to be able to make what I am trying to say clear. Sorry for the inconvenience.
No apology necessary, I'd prefer to understand is all.
My issue is not with the wangrod defense. What doesn't make sense to me is where metagaming comes in. Metagaming is, I'm pretty sure, deciding what your character would say or do based on information not available to the character, only to the player. Saying "my character would" is not always metagaming. It's only metagaming if what follows after "would" is something the character actually would not, but the player does. Players shouldn't want to say what they would do, they should say what their character would do. That's what's confusing me.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think what Geann is saying is that there is no in character reason for the warlock to do what he did. The group is about to go into a goblin dungeon where the team is going to be facing bug bears, hobgoblins and goblin hordes, and NOW he decided, "You know what will be a laugh, backstabbing my team mates without warning!". Its not something a rational adventurer would do, there's no motivation, it damages their chances for survival, it's just done because the player want's to make himself feel cool and powerful above game, i.e. metagaming. It was not done to fulfil any character goals, it was done because the player knows it is a game and does not matter, because the players have to tolerate him if they want to continue playing.
I think what Geann is saying is that there is no in character reason for the warlock to do what he did. The group is about to go into a goblin dungeon where the team is going to be facing bug bears, hobgoblins and goblin hordes, and NOW he decided, "You know what will be a laugh, backstabbing my team mates without warning!". Its not something a rational adventurer would do, there's no motivation, it damages their chances for survival, it's just done because the player want's to make himself feel cool and powerful above game, i.e. metagaming. It was not done to fulfil any character goals, it was done because the player knows it is a game and does not matter, because the players have to tolerate him if they want to continue playing.
He gave you a motivation. You may not like it, you may think it's a weak one, but he gave you one. It also wasn't really stabbing your character in the back - your character didn't get hurt in any way, your character was taught a lesson. Not one I'd personally care for, but I'm not that player.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
My character did get hurt, he dropped me to below half hit points. The party had to waste a healing potion healing him back up because we were about to go into a dungeon. I don't see how it isn't backstabbing to voice no complaint when the bugbear is negotiating for information you need on a promise of letting the captive live, then going through said bugbear to murder the captive because 'I don't like others making promises for me'. We've already established that is completely evil thing to do to begin with, and against someone on your own side, if that's not a betrayal, I don't know what would be considered one.
My character did get hurt, he dropped me to below half hit points.
From your post I surmized your character jumped in front of the goblin or something. That's not quite the same thing as him going through your character, especially since the rules don't typically allow you to block an eldritch blast targeting someone else.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
True, it was a reflex save to block, but he kept on firing regardless, with him in the way and knowing he could kill him. Mechanically it's not in the rules, but it was clear the intention was to kill the goblin regardless of if he got killed trying to stop him. To be honest, I should have probably thought to grapple him but hindsight is 20/20.
But everything you and everyone else said has been helpful, I feel like I can talk to the players and figure out a good course of action, and how to better play the character. And if everything goes south, there are online groups.
True, it was a reflex save to block, but he kept on firing regardless, with him in the way and knowing he could kill him. Mechanically it's not in the rules, but it was clear the intention was to kill the goblin regardless of if he got killed trying to stop him. To be honest, I should have probably thought to grapple him but hindsight is 20/20.
No problem, I'm all for that kind of bending the rules. Just did't recall the damage your character took because of it - arguably more your own fault than the other PC's (morality aside). Hope you hit your stride in the campaign.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So basic follow up, everything turned out ok. No one had any issues, and for my part I may have panicked a bit. We played it off just fine, used the opportunity as an icebreaker, and things are going well now.
Glad to hear it. Getting started with a new D&D group can be delicate work sometimes, but if you can get past the rough spots it's one of the fastest way to make new friends you can find.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
Please do not contact or message me.
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Playing online is fairly straight forward you generally need 3 things (though some services can provide more than 1 and they are not all compulsorary)
As far as finding a group there is a page on the forum here as well as on most the the VTT sites. Sometimes the DM will charge (it is up to you if you are willing to pay for a campaign but DMs that don't charge generally have more applications than they can accept so it might take a few attempts ot find a game), the DM may have master tier subscriptions giving you access to all the content they have bought.
As well as campaigns there are quite a few discord servers set up for playing one shots in various ways. Sometimes they also have campaigns and one shots, this can be a good way to find out you like the DMs style with one-shots before committing to a campaign.
I agree with yurei. This seems more like an issue with the table dynamics than anything in character. you were expecting a different kind of game than they are playing. You can either adjust your character to more go along with the way the party works (play it like your character had a revelation that evil is more fun), talk to them about it out of character and see if they’ll dial it back a bit (say something like, you missed the session 0 kind of thing and you’d like a quick rundown of expectations and how the party works, so you can know what you’re getting yourself into), or leave the group.
It sounds like a perfectly reasonable conflict to have in character. Sounds like the warlock is chaotic evil or chaotic neutral. You say your character is neutral good, but I could see your attitudes fitting with any combination of neutral / lawful neutral / good. In any case, there are plenty of ways to conflict with chaotic evil. Parties can hold together that have conflicting alignments. You just have to set boundaries as characters, and maybe as players. For example, maybe you can say,
"If you don't like the way I negotiate, you talk to the goblins. Oh? You can't? Then maybe follow my lead when we deal with them."
Now, if things seem to be sliding in the wrong direction in character, step out of character, and establish that you're not personally upset, you're just playing how your character would react.
If you can't find a resolution in character that you think is believable for your character, or you as a player just aren't having fun, then discuss with the DM how you can best resolve the situation with minimal disruption to the game. Maybe you want to drop out of the game. Maybe you want to create a new character that is not a goblinoid or is not good. Either way, either your character can PVP (if the DM is okay with it) and get killed, run away from the party, or become an NPC controlled by the DM (if you're okay with it).
The classic, old school line of thought was that all creatures who were Evil were irredeemably so. Killing them was a good thing, it was necessary because otherwise the entire world would be overrun with monsters like; goblins, hobgoblins, and bugbears. So take a look at the Warlock again. How do they behave? They got all kinds of upset because someone else swore an oath and then interfered when it was time to break it. They see themselves as only doing what has to be done... Yep. Lawful Good. They were playing an "Anti-Hero", someone who does what they have to, and is willing to use the tools of evil against a greater evil.
Way back when Paladins were required to be Lawful Good, and lost their powers when they were not, a lot of those old school DMs like to mess with Paladins by presenting them with situations to test their morals against their ethics. It's called "Situational Morality" and applies to people who have moved into an area where there's a different culture. They get what is called "Culture Shock". The rules have changed, sometimes in horrifying ways, and they don't know what to do. Maybe the OP was in fact playing a Paladin, because their behavior is very much like the old school Lawful Good Paladin.
They joined a game, they experienced culture shock, and they felt betrayed.
<Insert clever signature here>
I love this line.
I think I can adapt my playstyle, the only issue is I don't like the idea of PVP issues like this where I have to debate both IC and OOC on how to act so as not to lose the character or be booted from the group, that's not fun for me. I can play my character as disapproving of the murderhobing, but not going to stop them because bugbears usually put heads on pikes. As long as their doing it to people who attack them, and not slaughtering innocents he can go along with it, he may give a disapproving look when they are being unnecessarily brutal, but he's not going to say anything or get in their way.
I believe when I asked him about his alignment before we started, he either said chaotic good or chaotic neutral. When I asked in shock why he had done what he did, he said 'My character doesn't like promises being made for him'. Given what's been said, he's actually playing chaotic evil, he just wants to do what he wants. That and he's salty the Bugbear spoke as a representative of the party. With the advise here I can definitely call him out on his character's racism and have a way forward without my character becoming the butt of abuse for the party, my only concern is this sparks a PVP PK scenario. I want to talk to the DM beforehand and tell him my concern, but I'm hoping this can be resolved and we get back to playing with the understanding that the characters shouldn't be backstabbing each other because "HEY I"M CHAOTIC!!!".
"My character doesn't like promises being made for him" You are absolutely right, any time someone says "My character would" they are meta-gaming. They don't want to say what they would do, they want their character to be able to think for them. That's the opposite of role-playing, that's Rule Playing.
<Insert clever signature here>
What? This makes no sense...
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
"I don't like promises being made for me," is perfectly compatible with any chaotic alignment. A chaotic good character will definitely break a promise if fulfilling it would be evil. Killing an enemy that's not a threat isn't very good, but it's definitely combatible with chaotic neutral. It could even be compatible with chaotic good if the character reasons that the goblin will terrorize more people if they set it free.
However, "It's what my character would do," doesn't cover all sins. The warlock player is bordering on chaotic annoying. There are those players who taunt the enemy while you're trying to be stealthy or stab the NPC you're negotiating with because, "It's what my character would do. I'm chaotic." There is a point where a character can be too chaotic to be a team player on an adventuring party, and what the other characters in the party would do is kick him to the curb. It doesn't seem like that's the case in this game, though, as the other players seem pretty tolerant of chaos.
I'm going to go ahead and guess he is talking about "The Wangrod Defense", when you insist you must play your character a certain way because "it's what my character would do, I have no choice".
To the OP, everything up to this point sounds so convoluted that I can hardly see how playing with this group will be fun for you. With my friends, we've all made murderhobos to run in a diabolic campaign but, even these characters had group cohesion and shared goals.
Once again, I don't seem to be able to make what I am trying to say clear. Sorry for the inconvenience.
<Insert clever signature here>
No apology necessary, I'd prefer to understand is all.
My issue is not with the wangrod defense. What doesn't make sense to me is where metagaming comes in. Metagaming is, I'm pretty sure, deciding what your character would say or do based on information not available to the character, only to the player. Saying "my character would" is not always metagaming. It's only metagaming if what follows after "would" is something the character actually would not, but the player does. Players shouldn't want to say what they would do, they should say what their character would do. That's what's confusing me.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
I think what Geann is saying is that there is no in character reason for the warlock to do what he did. The group is about to go into a goblin dungeon where the team is going to be facing bug bears, hobgoblins and goblin hordes, and NOW he decided, "You know what will be a laugh, backstabbing my team mates without warning!". Its not something a rational adventurer would do, there's no motivation, it damages their chances for survival, it's just done because the player want's to make himself feel cool and powerful above game, i.e. metagaming. It was not done to fulfil any character goals, it was done because the player knows it is a game and does not matter, because the players have to tolerate him if they want to continue playing.
He gave you a motivation. You may not like it, you may think it's a weak one, but he gave you one. It also wasn't really stabbing your character in the back - your character didn't get hurt in any way, your character was taught a lesson. Not one I'd personally care for, but I'm not that player.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
My character did get hurt, he dropped me to below half hit points. The party had to waste a healing potion healing him back up because we were about to go into a dungeon. I don't see how it isn't backstabbing to voice no complaint when the bugbear is negotiating for information you need on a promise of letting the captive live, then going through said bugbear to murder the captive because 'I don't like others making promises for me'. We've already established that is completely evil thing to do to begin with, and against someone on your own side, if that's not a betrayal, I don't know what would be considered one.
From your post I surmized your character jumped in front of the goblin or something. That's not quite the same thing as him going through your character, especially since the rules don't typically allow you to block an eldritch blast targeting someone else.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
True, it was a reflex save to block, but he kept on firing regardless, with him in the way and knowing he could kill him. Mechanically it's not in the rules, but it was clear the intention was to kill the goblin regardless of if he got killed trying to stop him. To be honest, I should have probably thought to grapple him but hindsight is 20/20.
But everything you and everyone else said has been helpful, I feel like I can talk to the players and figure out a good course of action, and how to better play the character. And if everything goes south, there are online groups.
No problem, I'm all for that kind of bending the rules. Just did't recall the damage your character took because of it - arguably more your own fault than the other PC's (morality aside). Hope you hit your stride in the campaign.
Want to start playing but don't have anyone to play with? You can try these options: [link].
So basic follow up, everything turned out ok. No one had any issues, and for my part I may have panicked a bit. We played it off just fine, used the opportunity as an icebreaker, and things are going well now.
Glad to hear it. Getting started with a new D&D group can be delicate work sometimes, but if you can get past the rough spots it's one of the fastest way to make new friends you can find.
Please do not contact or message me.