I started playing D&D about 2 months ago with my siblings who are all mostly new to the game. My older brother is the DM and he's only played a few times before and it was a few years ago. Anyway, we're just about to finish off the starter campaign, clearing Wave Echo Cave. We've all agreed that we'll continue on and expand the campaign.
My issue is this, I'm very aware that my character stands out from the rest but I'm not sure if it's in a good way. I'm playing a chaotic neutral, oath of vengeance, tiefling paladin with an urchin background. - I wanted a character that was ruthless, devious but ultimately NOT evil and NOT a murderhobo. - Somewhere between Hellboy and the Punisher. Also he worships Tritherion - God of liberty and retribution.
The problem is, the rest of the party are borderline pacifists. Even our dragonborn barbarian is more of a gentle giant who forgets his own strength. I personally quite like the idea of adding in a bit of group tension/conflict. So I don't mind being one that the rest of the group has to reign in and keep under control. And eventually I'd like to show the character growth where he begins to soften slightly. But I'm not sure if this is undercutting the rest of the group. I'm also very aware that I have become the face of the group as I am the most prone to action. The rest of the group are very indecisive. We played a session in which my spirit had been dragged out of my body to the realm of death to commune with a long dead knight, it left me with 4 levels of exhaustion. So the rest of the session, I deliberately took a backseat and let the others do all the decision making. They struggled to progress beyond the very obvious plot hooks.
In our latest session, we came to a barricaded door with what sounded like several very large wolves behind. Next to it, a set of stairs leading down. I turned to the rest of the group and said 'we can open the door and take on what's inside or we can reinforce the door and go down the stairs. What do you guys what to do?' and they all just stared blankly.
As I've said, I'd like to have him gradually soften but the group hasn't given me opportunities to make that work. Another session, I freed a bunch of enslaved goblins, armed them all and set them on the orc slave drivers. I then faced down the head guard, beat him into submission attached a magical collar onto him (battle royal style bomb collar) and threw him into the mass of goblins. The rest of the party thought I was horrible because he wasn't that bad a guy. An orc slave driver.
I know this is a bit long winded but I'm just not sure if the character who is the most at odds with the rest of the group should be the 'leader', am I dominating the group and robbing them of enjoyment? Would a different, more moral character work better? Or do I stick with him and relish the inner party conflict?
You did not indicate the age range of your siblings. I understand confidentiality and needing to keep that information close to the chest if they are minors, but as a DM that introduces new players to the game (age ranges from 10-14 years), I can say that age and maturity alter how the player actually plays. From your post, I don't peg you as towards the younger range, but you do have a CN Tiefling Vengance Paladin which makes me question your overall maturity ;D. I am going to guess that you are the oldest sibling in the player cohort and the other players are happy enough to let their older sibling (going to guess brother) do most of the heavy lifting because you have not only been doing it so far, but have gotten good (read fun) results.
I do want to say that you are expecting a bit too much out of them, if you want your sibs to provide that cathartic emotional tether to allow you to blunt your current PCs actions and behavior. They are likely not mature enough themselves to see what you are wanting to accomplish. I would instead, speak to your brother the DM about your desires and see if he can incorporate story elements on his end to allow you to play through such a spiritual journey. If it cannot be worked out and you think that this PC has accomplished all he can with the existing group, have is story wrapped up and move him on to other things and bring in a PC that (metagame) understands the what the other PCs need and can provide them. Perhaps a Fighter: Battlemaster with the Protection Fighting Style and Shield Master Feat as an inspiring leader?
Sorry, should've specified. I'm actually the youngest of the group, 27 years old, they're all a few years older, the oldest being the DM at 34.
The rest of the group haven't revealed much character depth so it's hard to know what they're going for in terms of motivation and agendas. I'm not sure if that's because I'm being too much of a dictator or they just haven't fleshed out their characters much and are unsure how to act. I'm just very aware of becoming 'that guy', taking the reigns and steering the campaign in a direction the others don't want to go and making it all about me.
Sometimes it's just player experience. They may not be confident enough in the rules and what they can actually do yet. (Especially if they're video-gamers.) Maybe give them time, and mention to your DM brother to try and check with the others. So when you say what your character is doing he can say, "OK while he's doing that, Biff, what are YOU doing?"
Question: are you enjoying the game? Are your brothers enjoying the game? If yes to both, your character is fine. Okay, maybe he stands out, but is that a bad thing? If your character is the natural leader of the group, maybe you should think of a reason in game. Clearly, there is a group dynamic, if it is a meta-reason based on the fact you are all related and coming together to play a game. But if the more pacifistic characters aren't complaining about your character, then maybe they see a use for your character, even if they can't act that way themselves. For example, I hate tattoos. I will never get a tattoo. However, this is a decision about I govern my life. I don't want other people to feel like my distain for tattoos is a condemnation of them or anyone for their tattoos. Maybe your brother's characters are the same, but towards violence: they understand its importance, but it isn't for them. That's fine, especially since it seems like they aren't comfortable with the more roleplaying aspects of the game. Personally, I think roleplaying is the only reason to play D&D and I like politics and intregue and "pointless" interaction with NPCs. However, many people, including a lot of people at my own table, don't. They like dungeon crawling and combat and -- probably more than anything-- hanging out with their friends. That's okay. Different types of players can coexist at the same tables. Actually, it is probably healthier in the long run that not everyone wants to be the leader and do the talking. "Too many cooks in the kitchen."
Don't stress about playing the game "right." Just have fun.
I would say that you should just continue role playing to the best of your ability and hopefully they will learn something from you. Maybe engage one of their characters in-character asking about their backstory or outlook. You can still soften your character over time through exposure to them, but maybe it happens because your character is ever curious about the way they live their lives, and through many in-chatacter conversations, decides they might have a point. I've always been of the school of thought that if you engage someone in-character, then that person will generally respond in character, even if that's a new player who doesn't have anything in mind and has to make a character decision on the spot.
Whether or not you fit in, it does sound like an interesting dynamic that you can make work. It's almost like you're the shoulder devil (pun intended) of the party steering them into more of the morally grey areas, but you're also leader, so it's just as much like they're all YOUR shoulder angels. That sounds like a cool group dynamic to play around with.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
I started playing D&D about 2 months ago with my siblings who are all mostly new to the game. My older brother is the DM and he's only played a few times before and it was a few years ago. Anyway, we're just about to finish off the starter campaign, clearing Wave Echo Cave. We've all agreed that we'll continue on and expand the campaign.
My issue is this, I'm very aware that my character stands out from the rest but I'm not sure if it's in a good way. I'm playing a chaotic neutral, oath of vengeance, tiefling paladin with an urchin background. - I wanted a character that was ruthless, devious but ultimately NOT evil and NOT a murderhobo. - Somewhere between Hellboy and the Punisher. Also he worships Tritherion - God of liberty and retribution.
The problem is, the rest of the party are borderline pacifists. Even our dragonborn barbarian is more of a gentle giant who forgets his own strength. I personally quite like the idea of adding in a bit of group tension/conflict. So I don't mind being one that the rest of the group has to reign in and keep under control. And eventually I'd like to show the character growth where he begins to soften slightly. But I'm not sure if this is undercutting the rest of the group. I'm also very aware that I have become the face of the group as I am the most prone to action. The rest of the group are very indecisive. We played a session in which my spirit had been dragged out of my body to the realm of death to commune with a long dead knight, it left me with 4 levels of exhaustion. So the rest of the session, I deliberately took a backseat and let the others do all the decision making. They struggled to progress beyond the very obvious plot hooks.
In our latest session, we came to a barricaded door with what sounded like several very large wolves behind. Next to it, a set of stairs leading down. I turned to the rest of the group and said 'we can open the door and take on what's inside or we can reinforce the door and go down the stairs. What do you guys what to do?' and they all just stared blankly.
As I've said, I'd like to have him gradually soften but the group hasn't given me opportunities to make that work. Another session, I freed a bunch of enslaved goblins, armed them all and set them on the orc slave drivers. I then faced down the head guard, beat him into submission attached a magical collar onto him (battle royal style bomb collar) and threw him into the mass of goblins. The rest of the party thought I was horrible because he wasn't that bad a guy. An orc slave driver.
I know this is a bit long winded but I'm just not sure if the character who is the most at odds with the rest of the group should be the 'leader', am I dominating the group and robbing them of enjoyment? Would a different, more moral character work better? Or do I stick with him and relish the inner party conflict?
You did not indicate the age range of your siblings. I understand confidentiality and needing to keep that information close to the chest if they are minors, but as a DM that introduces new players to the game (age ranges from 10-14 years), I can say that age and maturity alter how the player actually plays. From your post, I don't peg you as towards the younger range, but you do have a CN Tiefling Vengance Paladin which makes me question your overall maturity ;D. I am going to guess that you are the oldest sibling in the player cohort and the other players are happy enough to let their older sibling (going to guess brother) do most of the heavy lifting because you have not only been doing it so far, but have gotten good (read fun) results.
I do want to say that you are expecting a bit too much out of them, if you want your sibs to provide that cathartic emotional tether to allow you to blunt your current PCs actions and behavior. They are likely not mature enough themselves to see what you are wanting to accomplish. I would instead, speak to your brother the DM about your desires and see if he can incorporate story elements on his end to allow you to play through such a spiritual journey. If it cannot be worked out and you think that this PC has accomplished all he can with the existing group, have is story wrapped up and move him on to other things and bring in a PC that (metagame) understands the what the other PCs need and can provide them. Perhaps a Fighter: Battlemaster with the Protection Fighting Style and Shield Master Feat as an inspiring leader?
Sorry, should've specified. I'm actually the youngest of the group, 27 years old, they're all a few years older, the oldest being the DM at 34.
The rest of the group haven't revealed much character depth so it's hard to know what they're going for in terms of motivation and agendas. I'm not sure if that's because I'm being too much of a dictator or they just haven't fleshed out their characters much and are unsure how to act. I'm just very aware of becoming 'that guy', taking the reigns and steering the campaign in a direction the others don't want to go and making it all about me.
Sometimes it's just player experience. They may not be confident enough in the rules and what they can actually do yet. (Especially if they're video-gamers.) Maybe give them time, and mention to your DM brother to try and check with the others. So when you say what your character is doing he can say, "OK while he's doing that, Biff, what are YOU doing?"
Question: are you enjoying the game? Are your brothers enjoying the game? If yes to both, your character is fine. Okay, maybe he stands out, but is that a bad thing? If your character is the natural leader of the group, maybe you should think of a reason in game. Clearly, there is a group dynamic, if it is a meta-reason based on the fact you are all related and coming together to play a game. But if the more pacifistic characters aren't complaining about your character, then maybe they see a use for your character, even if they can't act that way themselves. For example, I hate tattoos. I will never get a tattoo. However, this is a decision about I govern my life. I don't want other people to feel like my distain for tattoos is a condemnation of them or anyone for their tattoos. Maybe your brother's characters are the same, but towards violence: they understand its importance, but it isn't for them. That's fine, especially since it seems like they aren't comfortable with the more roleplaying aspects of the game. Personally, I think roleplaying is the only reason to play D&D and I like politics and intregue and "pointless" interaction with NPCs. However, many people, including a lot of people at my own table, don't. They like dungeon crawling and combat and -- probably more than anything-- hanging out with their friends. That's okay. Different types of players can coexist at the same tables. Actually, it is probably healthier in the long run that not everyone wants to be the leader and do the talking. "Too many cooks in the kitchen."
Don't stress about playing the game "right." Just have fun.
I would say that you should just continue role playing to the best of your ability and hopefully they will learn something from you. Maybe engage one of their characters in-character asking about their backstory or outlook. You can still soften your character over time through exposure to them, but maybe it happens because your character is ever curious about the way they live their lives, and through many in-chatacter conversations, decides they might have a point. I've always been of the school of thought that if you engage someone in-character, then that person will generally respond in character, even if that's a new player who doesn't have anything in mind and has to make a character decision on the spot.
Whether or not you fit in, it does sound like an interesting dynamic that you can make work. It's almost like you're the shoulder devil (pun intended) of the party steering them into more of the morally grey areas, but you're also leader, so it's just as much like they're all YOUR shoulder angels. That sounds like a cool group dynamic to play around with.