So I got a question for the group. My group is playing a side campaign while our normal DM is getting the next big campaign set up. This is when one of the players in the group DM for a couple of sessions. In the mini campaign I am playing a "vengeance seeker" I killed a guy (NPC) in broad daylight in front of the group because he wronged me (and to give the party the idea of how I am playing my character). So into the campaign the DM sets up this puzzle which was written in a language 2 of the 4 party could read. I am playing the character who could not read the note.
Needless to say the party members who could read the note did not say anything to the other party members but just went to attack me and the other guy. I saw the "bad players" kill the other guy who could not read the note and since I could not take on two tanky player I ran. That is where the session ended. The DM is telling me she could offer my character "some protection" and I am like "My character thinks she is going to be killed she is going to need more than "their word" that she is going to be safe while traveling together. Since I am playing a vengeance character why wouldn't I go after them in vengeance. The DM will not spilt the party "Because it is hard" and she is also claiming that "I had no idea they were going to do that" And I am absolutely do not believe her (like why else would you put that wording on the puzzle then if you didn't anticipate that was a possibility). The DM is like you can take the protection I am offering you and rejoin the party but if you decide to keep your distance from the group because your character is afraid of the bad players you cant blame me for not "engaging" you in the story anymore and "no-one would blame you for sitting the rest of the campaign out". Now I am really angry b/c she is especially punishing my player for acting as my character would in that situation.
So what would be considered a reasonable solution to this impasse. Thanks for any suggestions.
PC 1& 2 attacked 3 &4 b/c of the note (w/o telling us about the note). I talked to the player who died afterwards to thank him "for saving me". He has no trouble teaming up with me with his new character. But he is telling me "to play nice with the group" and I am rolling my eyes at him.
No way would a character, having seen two other characters kill another character, hang around with them voluntarily. Your DM sounds utterly terrible for encouraging that kind of behaviour as well. No offence, but that storyline needs retconning like crazy. Hopefully all these characters wake up from a terrible nightmare where they all inexplicably acted like spineless murderers, and can go on a decent adventure together again.
I will save you a lot of headache: find another table. No D&D is better than bad D&D and there is no good reason to let someone else kill your love of the game. This absolutely would happen with a DM that threatens to neglect you because they cannot be bothered to DM the consequences of their own making.
There is a certain point to which your character must be willing to go on the adventure or be left behind. This scenario is far beyond that. It makes sense for any sane character to not want to deal with those two afterwards. Be it on moral grounds or for their own self interest. If nobody's willing to meet you half way on this it may be better to walk way. The members of a party don't always have to be buddy buddy found family but they need 'enough' trust and reason to work/travel together, and after this event, if it's really the barely prompted act of murder you describe, leaves pretty much no reason to trust the other two anymore.
Was there no bond between the characters before the note was delivered?
It sounds like the two who could read the note are not to be trusted by anybody else, if they kill one of "their own" in order to complete some sort of ritual.
Tough situation but since it is a mini campaign between the main DM and their next campaign I say talk to the DM and see if your character can join up with the BBEG of this mini campaign to exact vengeance on the other two. You’re a vengeance seeker so go seek it.
You may have to take this character out of the campaign and roll a new one until the BBEG/vengeance seeker team up is revealed. Or play along until you can get vengeance. Or just bow out of the mini campaign and wait for the original DM to start the new one (if that DM has been running a good game for everyone)
Either way, talk to the new DM and see if something can be worked out, roll a new character and forget vengeance seeker, or leave the group if it is untenable
Talking between the GM and you and potentially the other players is important and I think that you can solve the issue between all of you.
Also things happen in RPGing, your PC does not interact well with other PC's the GM and or player thinks the others will do X and they do something that cannot be expressed in the English language. Note it is also important for the GM and players to remember they are not the PC's and the PC are not them. So the GM and or a player might need to meta game and say something if the PC/NPC does something they would not think of. For example in your case the GM may say a PC reads the note out loud even though the player did not say their PC did so.
Hmmm... I wonder if it would be possible for you to invite your DM into this thread. That way if it's just a DM who is inexperienced, or there is a way to help them do better, the community can coach them to their success and your fun.
Honestly, I think this is something missing from the community when somebody has a complaint about a player or a DM. If we were able to coach both parties through whatever the issues are, then we could end up with better players and DM's, and less complaints.
Also, most of the time I read about these types of complaints (not just ddb, but rpg horror stories are everywhere online) I've often wondered how much of it is due to misunderstanding and inexperience. I have a feeling most of the time it is. If a DM or a player is having a rough time with a game it can be frustrating, leading them to quit the game when the solution could have been readily available.
We need more DM's, and inexperienced DM's will make mistakes, this upset players, leading to frustration with the game, people quitting, and fewer DM's. This is not the way.
Basically what I'm saying is, in general, if you going to post about a problem you are having with a player or your DM, maybe it would be beneficial to invite them into the conversation too so the community can help in a more positive way. This may in turn lead to less DM turnover, which means they are able to gain more experience, and that means happier players overall.
I'm not sure I'm following the sequence of events. You killed a (as far as they knew) random guy in broad daylight, then they read a note that said kill someone randomly and they picked you?
What was the puzzle? What was at stake?
It's hard to see either side as the instigator since you introduced early on that murder for "it's what my character would do" reasons is ok, but it seems like you're upset with them for trying to kill you when that seems like "what [their] characters would do."
That's why, even when playing an evil character, i try never to play the kind of character that would murder someone in broad daylight in front of a group. You have to ask yourself; why didn't the Count of Monte Cristo (the most vengeance-y vengeance to ever vengeance) not simply walk up to Villeforte and stab him? 1, from a storytelling perspective, audiences wouldn't sympathize with the Count if he just went around murdering people. 2, the book would be way shorter and less interesting, ending with him either killed by guards or shipped off back to prison forever. 3, murder lacks poetic justice, which is appealing to the audience and to the character of the Count, for whom killing Villefort would let him off too easily and who would rather manipulate his enemies into destroying themselves.
Basically, even when playing a character with violent motives, there's a right way and a wrong way to go about achieving them, and sudden murder is prone to assumptions and miscommunications that can tear party's apart. Even if you're playing a character who is the most vengeance-y vengeance to ever vengeance, you should still feel justified in acting within the confines of society in a way that's not going to turn off fellow party members and make enemies of them and the npcs. Just because your character is violent, doesn't mean they also can't count and aren't aware that there are more guards than there are them, or that actions have consequences.
Remember that at the end of the day you are in control of "what your character would do" so that isn't an excuse not to consider ramifications of your actions. Without knowing the motives of the players who attacked you, I can't say conclusively if you ATA or not, but it sounds like foul on both sides.
So what would be considered a reasonable solution to this impasse. Thanks for any suggestions.
You are not going to want to hear this but quit the game. Quit the game and my advice never play with any of those individuals in that group again. They are not your friends. They did not come talk to you about it all most likely because the two of them and the DM had discussed it at length and the conversation was what to do about you. These people are not just duplicitous but they are cowards as well.
They can't come to you and openly discuss their grievance so they play some stupid game out of character. It is metagaming. They were reacting to the fact that your character just murdered someone in the street and the DM telling them there would be repercussions. They were not responding to the in game outrage because if they were, they would have dealt with it then. If it were me playing a LG or LN character then I would have probably drew my sword and got in your way before allowing you to strike a death blow and if I could not stop that would have called your character out then and there and demanded you leave the group. This is assuming that there really was no justification for your action. This would have been fine because it would be in game and not metagaming. A character like yours can't be in a party that has Lawful characters or Good characters that actually care about their alignment reputation. That is not a slight on you but the reality of the game. At that point the discussion would be I have to ditch my character and make a CE one or you have to ditch yours because your action split the group. In game this is fine.
AS a DM if I had a problem with it I would not metagame weird notes to give players cover for attacking you. DM's who do that are terrible DMs in my book. I would have taken you aside and had a conversation with you that this was an issue with the game and said make a new character concept. Unless I thought you were a munchkin power gamer who did this just to cause issues with the party at which point I would have just said this game in not for you because this reason and I sorry unless you can prove to me you can play along with the group dynamic maybe you should find another game.
What you did is problematic for the group. The My character is "vengeful" and I have a flaw argument does not really justify that. You are still a problem for the group. The town constables of the town are still going to hunt you for murder and possibly anyone else in the group that you are with. This is not a classy moment for you no matter how much you want to justify it or how much you did not mean it this way.
On the other hand the DM was equally classless. They manipulated things in a way that was not at all the right way to handle it. They "I did not think they would do that line" followed up with the suggestion you set out the adventure line is her trying to subtly kick you out without having to be seen as doing it. It is manipulative and duplicitous and the first sign of a bad DM. I would accept arguments that there was an in game reason for it if anyone there had approached you to talk about it out of character to explain why but it seems that was not done. If it were me I would move on. There are a lot of people that play games like that and in my experience from making the mistake of hanging around to have a game to play with in the end the campaigns suffer and break down because of it. Those games usually end up being the ones that are not fun to play.
Thanks to everyone that responded. Thank you for letting me rant here.
I'm angry because before the game even started I told the DM how I wanted to play this character. I assumed if the DM had an issue with me playing a vengeance character they would have told me outright it was a "problem" or even "you will need to live within the consequences of playing such a character" and I would have happily changed it no problem. The DM seemed ok with it.
If the players want to act "evil" that is fine (I am playing the vengeance character so sure let them play evil no issues from me). Part of the reason I announced my "vengeance" aspect by killing the NPC in front of the party was for the reason "if anyone in the party is LG (or have any objection to the type of character I am playing) come and get me now before we go on this adventure so we do not have a problem later".
But for the DM to "force" me to change my "alignment" midgame than fair is fair something should have happened in game to the "evil" characters. Maybe they get cursed and they are not able to attack the party anymore or something. Why are they allowed to still play their "evil" characters but I cannot play the vengeance character?
I would have been fine playing as a background character (let the party continue but some rolls where I am searching for the party to get my revenge or something) or hell getting killed in first few minutes in the next session because I want my revenge and I am going to get killed trying to kill them.
For background to give a bit more context.
-We were sent to another dimension by an NPC who told us his village was being destroyed by the BBEG so the PC got together to say "Fine we will save your village yadayada"
-After we were sent to the other dimension we discovered some ghostly inhabitants who told us "Oh hey you were sent here by that NPC, yeah he likes tricking ppl into coming here to feed 'em to the BBEG, and the BBEG is neigh invincible unless you do this preforms a series of rituals to weaken him"
-The party DID NOT like the fact the NPC sent us here to our "deaths" so the cleric killed him.
-One of the rituals that needed to be preformed was the screenshot I posted (and the NPC has been dead for a session or two so the temp DM could have changed the puzzle if they intended us to sacrifice the NPC). If the DM REALLY did not want us to attack each other the DM could have rewritten that ritual to something else.
-The location we were in was a tomb we were hiding from BBEG after he killed one of our players (the cleric was reviving him, I was with the cleric, and the two "evil" characters were wandering around the tomb when they found the note. The evil characters intended to sacrifice the dying- getting resurrected player but when THAT character refused to be revived they went after me and the cleric.
-Because of the fight they were not able to use the cleric (the cleric got killed outside the circle) and I fled at that point (I am playing a monk so I spent a key point or two getting the hell out of the tomb and taking my chances outrunning the BBEG). The two evil characters found an unconscious NPC in one of the coffins and they ended up sacrificing him.
-According to the DM the party was supposed to search the tomb BEFORE deciding to murder each other (and the DM did not accept responsibility- the Temp DM is telling me to blame the players for choosing to attack me) but I frankly do not blame these "evil" characters for following the note. What the hell were the chances of finding a live NPC in a tomb w/o metagaming?
----
As an update for what happened with the campaign.
-I am playing nice I accepted the DM proposition and when the two PC got revived into new characters I made sure they knew that the "evil" characters are killers and not to trust them (the players know they can't be trusted so we are ok on that front).
-Every time the "evil" character want me to "help" out I am keeping my distance and refusing to help with the rest of the rituals. I will help out the other characters but not those two.
-If the Temp DM decides to host another short campaign I will not get involved (unless concessions are made) and I just will come back to the group when the proper DM is in place.
I only played with this one group (with the proper DM) and I really like how he plays so I stuck around with this group. Since I haven no experience dealing with other DnD situations I just wanted to get the community impression on the situation. Thanks.
Can I ask the general age of your group and GM? As well as how long you have been playing 5e and RPG's in general?
Note: GM'ing is not for everyone and even people who have been playing for a long time have trouble GMng. But I also understand some people just should not GM as I have experienced that problem in the past.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
So I got a question for the group. My group is playing a side campaign while our normal DM is getting the next big campaign set up. This is when one of the players in the group DM for a couple of sessions. In the mini campaign I am playing a "vengeance seeker" I killed a guy (NPC) in broad daylight in front of the group because he wronged me (and to give the party the idea of how I am playing my character). So into the campaign the DM sets up this puzzle which was written in a language 2 of the 4 party could read. I am playing the character who could not read the note.
Needless to say the party members who could read the note did not say anything to the other party members but just went to attack me and the other guy. I saw the "bad players" kill the other guy who could not read the note and since I could not take on two tanky player I ran. That is where the session ended. The DM is telling me she could offer my character "some protection" and I am like "My character thinks she is going to be killed she is going to need more than "their word" that she is going to be safe while traveling together. Since I am playing a vengeance character why wouldn't I go after them in vengeance. The DM will not spilt the party "Because it is hard" and she is also claiming that "I had no idea they were going to do that" And I am absolutely do not believe her (like why else would you put that wording on the puzzle then if you didn't anticipate that was a possibility). The DM is like you can take the protection I am offering you and rejoin the party but if you decide to keep your distance from the group because your character is afraid of the bad players you cant blame me for not "engaging" you in the story anymore and "no-one would blame you for sitting the rest of the campaign out". Now I am really angry b/c she is especially punishing my player for acting as my character would in that situation.
So what would be considered a reasonable solution to this impasse. Thanks for any suggestions.
So PCs 1 and 2 attacked PC 3, and didn't inform PC 4 (you) of why? I'd like to know how the player of PC 3 is reacting to this situation as well.
Birgit | Shifter | Sorcerer | Dragonlords
Shayone | Hobgoblin | Sorcerer | Netherdeep
PC 1& 2 attacked 3 &4 b/c of the note (w/o telling us about the note). I talked to the player who died afterwards to thank him "for saving me". He has no trouble teaming up with me with his new character. But he is telling me "to play nice with the group" and I am rolling my eyes at him.
Oh, what a clusterbomb of a situation.
No way would a character, having seen two other characters kill another character, hang around with them voluntarily. Your DM sounds utterly terrible for encouraging that kind of behaviour as well. No offence, but that storyline needs retconning like crazy. Hopefully all these characters wake up from a terrible nightmare where they all inexplicably acted like spineless murderers, and can go on a decent adventure together again.
I will save you a lot of headache: find another table. No D&D is better than bad D&D and there is no good reason to let someone else kill your love of the game. This absolutely would happen with a DM that threatens to neglect you because they cannot be bothered to DM the consequences of their own making.
DM mostly, Player occasionally | Session 0 form | He/Him/They/Them
EXTENDED SIGNATURE!
Doctor/Published Scholar/Science and Healthcare Advocate/Critter/Trekkie/Gandalf with a Glock
Try DDB free: Free Rules (2024), premade PCs, adventures, one shots, encounters, SC, homebrew, more
Answers: physical books, purchases, and subbing.
Check out my life-changing
There is a certain point to which your character must be willing to go on the adventure or be left behind. This scenario is far beyond that. It makes sense for any sane character to not want to deal with those two afterwards. Be it on moral grounds or for their own self interest. If nobody's willing to meet you half way on this it may be better to walk way. The members of a party don't always have to be buddy buddy found family but they need 'enough' trust and reason to work/travel together, and after this event, if it's really the barely prompted act of murder you describe, leaves pretty much no reason to trust the other two anymore.
Was there no bond between the characters before the note was delivered?
It sounds like the two who could read the note are not to be trusted by anybody else, if they kill one of "their own" in order to complete some sort of ritual.
Tough situation but since it is a mini campaign between the main DM and their next campaign I say talk to the DM and see if your character can join up with the BBEG of this mini campaign to exact vengeance on the other two. You’re a vengeance seeker so go seek it.
You may have to take this character out of the campaign and roll a new one until the BBEG/vengeance seeker team up is revealed. Or play along until you can get vengeance. Or just bow out of the mini campaign and wait for the original DM to start the new one (if that DM has been running a good game for everyone)
Either way, talk to the new DM and see if something can be worked out, roll a new character and forget vengeance seeker, or leave the group if it is untenable
EZD6 by DM Scotty
https://www.drivethrurpg.com/en/product/397599/EZD6-Core-Rulebook?
Talking between the GM and you and potentially the other players is important and I think that you can solve the issue between all of you.
Also things happen in RPGing, your PC does not interact well with other PC's the GM and or player thinks the others will do X and they do something that cannot be expressed in the English language. Note it is also important for the GM and players to remember they are not the PC's and the PC are not them. So the GM and or a player might need to meta game and say something if the PC/NPC does something they would not think of. For example in your case the GM may say a PC reads the note out loud even though the player did not say their PC did so.
Hmmm... I wonder if it would be possible for you to invite your DM into this thread. That way if it's just a DM who is inexperienced, or there is a way to help them do better, the community can coach them to their success and your fun.
Honestly, I think this is something missing from the community when somebody has a complaint about a player or a DM. If we were able to coach both parties through whatever the issues are, then we could end up with better players and DM's, and less complaints.
Also, most of the time I read about these types of complaints (not just ddb, but rpg horror stories are everywhere online) I've often wondered how much of it is due to misunderstanding and inexperience. I have a feeling most of the time it is. If a DM or a player is having a rough time with a game it can be frustrating, leading them to quit the game when the solution could have been readily available.
We need more DM's, and inexperienced DM's will make mistakes, this upset players, leading to frustration with the game, people quitting, and fewer DM's. This is not the way.
Basically what I'm saying is, in general, if you going to post about a problem you are having with a player or your DM, maybe it would be beneficial to invite them into the conversation too so the community can help in a more positive way. This may in turn lead to less DM turnover, which means they are able to gain more experience, and that means happier players overall.
I'm not sure I'm following the sequence of events. You killed a (as far as they knew) random guy in broad daylight, then they read a note that said kill someone randomly and they picked you?
What was the puzzle? What was at stake?
It's hard to see either side as the instigator since you introduced early on that murder for "it's what my character would do" reasons is ok, but it seems like you're upset with them for trying to kill you when that seems like "what [their] characters would do."
That's why, even when playing an evil character, i try never to play the kind of character that would murder someone in broad daylight in front of a group. You have to ask yourself; why didn't the Count of Monte Cristo (the most vengeance-y vengeance to ever vengeance) not simply walk up to Villeforte and stab him? 1, from a storytelling perspective, audiences wouldn't sympathize with the Count if he just went around murdering people. 2, the book would be way shorter and less interesting, ending with him either killed by guards or shipped off back to prison forever. 3, murder lacks poetic justice, which is appealing to the audience and to the character of the Count, for whom killing Villefort would let him off too easily and who would rather manipulate his enemies into destroying themselves.
Basically, even when playing a character with violent motives, there's a right way and a wrong way to go about achieving them, and sudden murder is prone to assumptions and miscommunications that can tear party's apart. Even if you're playing a character who is the most vengeance-y vengeance to ever vengeance, you should still feel justified in acting within the confines of society in a way that's not going to turn off fellow party members and make enemies of them and the npcs. Just because your character is violent, doesn't mean they also can't count and aren't aware that there are more guards than there are them, or that actions have consequences.
Remember that at the end of the day you are in control of "what your character would do" so that isn't an excuse not to consider ramifications of your actions. Without knowing the motives of the players who attacked you, I can't say conclusively if you ATA or not, but it sounds like foul on both sides.
You are not going to want to hear this but quit the game. Quit the game and my advice never play with any of those individuals in that group again. They are not your friends. They did not come talk to you about it all most likely because the two of them and the DM had discussed it at length and the conversation was what to do about you. These people are not just duplicitous but they are cowards as well.
They can't come to you and openly discuss their grievance so they play some stupid game out of character. It is metagaming. They were reacting to the fact that your character just murdered someone in the street and the DM telling them there would be repercussions. They were not responding to the in game outrage because if they were, they would have dealt with it then. If it were me playing a LG or LN character then I would have probably drew my sword and got in your way before allowing you to strike a death blow and if I could not stop that would have called your character out then and there and demanded you leave the group. This is assuming that there really was no justification for your action. This would have been fine because it would be in game and not metagaming. A character like yours can't be in a party that has Lawful characters or Good characters that actually care about their alignment reputation. That is not a slight on you but the reality of the game. At that point the discussion would be I have to ditch my character and make a CE one or you have to ditch yours because your action split the group. In game this is fine.
AS a DM if I had a problem with it I would not metagame weird notes to give players cover for attacking you. DM's who do that are terrible DMs in my book. I would have taken you aside and had a conversation with you that this was an issue with the game and said make a new character concept. Unless I thought you were a munchkin power gamer who did this just to cause issues with the party at which point I would have just said this game in not for you because this reason and I sorry unless you can prove to me you can play along with the group dynamic maybe you should find another game.
What you did is problematic for the group. The My character is "vengeful" and I have a flaw argument does not really justify that. You are still a problem for the group. The town constables of the town are still going to hunt you for murder and possibly anyone else in the group that you are with. This is not a classy moment for you no matter how much you want to justify it or how much you did not mean it this way.
On the other hand the DM was equally classless. They manipulated things in a way that was not at all the right way to handle it. They "I did not think they would do that line" followed up with the suggestion you set out the adventure line is her trying to subtly kick you out without having to be seen as doing it. It is manipulative and duplicitous and the first sign of a bad DM. I would accept arguments that there was an in game reason for it if anyone there had approached you to talk about it out of character to explain why but it seems that was not done. If it were me I would move on. There are a lot of people that play games like that and in my experience from making the mistake of hanging around to have a game to play with in the end the campaigns suffer and break down because of it. Those games usually end up being the ones that are not fun to play.
Thanks to everyone that responded. Thank you for letting me rant here.
I'm angry because before the game even started I told the DM how I wanted to play this character. I assumed if the DM had an issue with me playing a vengeance character they would have told me outright it was a "problem" or even "you will need to live within the consequences of playing such a character" and I would have happily changed it no problem. The DM seemed ok with it.
If the players want to act "evil" that is fine (I am playing the vengeance character so sure let them play evil no issues from me). Part of the reason I announced my "vengeance" aspect by killing the NPC in front of the party was for the reason "if anyone in the party is LG (or have any objection to the type of character I am playing) come and get me now before we go on this adventure so we do not have a problem later".
But for the DM to "force" me to change my "alignment" midgame than fair is fair something should have happened in game to the "evil" characters. Maybe they get cursed and they are not able to attack the party anymore or something. Why are they allowed to still play their "evil" characters but I cannot play the vengeance character?
I would have been fine playing as a background character (let the party continue but some rolls where I am searching for the party to get my revenge or something) or hell getting killed in first few minutes in the next session because I want my revenge and I am going to get killed trying to kill them.
For background to give a bit more context.
-We were sent to another dimension by an NPC who told us his village was being destroyed by the BBEG so the PC got together to say "Fine we will save your village yadayada"
-After we were sent to the other dimension we discovered some ghostly inhabitants who told us "Oh hey you were sent here by that NPC, yeah he likes tricking ppl into coming here to feed 'em to the BBEG, and the BBEG is neigh invincible unless you do this preforms a series of rituals to weaken him"
-The party DID NOT like the fact the NPC sent us here to our "deaths" so the cleric killed him.
-One of the rituals that needed to be preformed was the screenshot I posted (and the NPC has been dead for a session or two so the temp DM could have changed the puzzle if they intended us to sacrifice the NPC). If the DM REALLY did not want us to attack each other the DM could have rewritten that ritual to something else.
-The location we were in was a tomb we were hiding from BBEG after he killed one of our players (the cleric was reviving him, I was with the cleric, and the two "evil" characters were wandering around the tomb when they found the note. The evil characters intended to sacrifice the dying- getting resurrected player but when THAT character refused to be revived they went after me and the cleric.
-Because of the fight they were not able to use the cleric (the cleric got killed outside the circle) and I fled at that point (I am playing a monk so I spent a key point or two getting the hell out of the tomb and taking my chances outrunning the BBEG). The two evil characters found an unconscious NPC in one of the coffins and they ended up sacrificing him.
-According to the DM the party was supposed to search the tomb BEFORE deciding to murder each other (and the DM did not accept responsibility- the Temp DM is telling me to blame the players for choosing to attack me) but I frankly do not blame these "evil" characters for following the note. What the hell were the chances of finding a live NPC in a tomb w/o metagaming?
----
As an update for what happened with the campaign.
-I am playing nice I accepted the DM proposition and when the two PC got revived into new characters I made sure they knew that the "evil" characters are killers and not to trust them (the players know they can't be trusted so we are ok on that front).
-Every time the "evil" character want me to "help" out I am keeping my distance and refusing to help with the rest of the rituals. I will help out the other characters but not those two.
-If the Temp DM decides to host another short campaign I will not get involved (unless concessions are made) and I just will come back to the group when the proper DM is in place.
I only played with this one group (with the proper DM) and I really like how he plays so I stuck around with this group. Since I haven no experience dealing with other DnD situations I just wanted to get the community impression on the situation. Thanks.
Can I ask the general age of your group and GM? As well as how long you have been playing 5e and RPG's in general?
Note: GM'ing is not for everyone and even people who have been playing for a long time have trouble GMng. But I also understand some people just should not GM as I have experienced that problem in the past.