| Author |
 Topic  |
|
|
Ragge
Acolyte
USA
23 Posts |
 Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 20:54:59
|
|
So i've just recently started to try my hand at DMing a compaign with a couple of my friends. Included in the party is a paladin, a rogue, a wizard and a ranger. Recently we killed a human character and the Paladin refused to let any one loot the corpse. However afterwards the rogue tip toed back over to the body and took some things. Should this be discussed openly to all players? or should this be only known to myself and the rogue character? And if so how do I do that? Because regardless of if the players characters didn't see him the players know what he did and the paladin was then all pissed off at the rogue even though he was supposed to not know. Which I did emphasize! It just seems that keeping player secrets away from other players is difficult. Any advice?
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 21:07:15
|
That's the problem using out of game knowledge in game. The pally has no idea what the rogue did, so the player shouldn't bring that knowledge into his character.
So, if it was my game, I'd keep it between the rogue and the DM. Next time, maybe have the player send you a private note or have the two of you leave the room to discuss it. |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
 |
|
|
WalkerNinja
Senior Scribe
USA
577 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 21:13:25
|
The issue is a complex one, especially since you and your players are so new to the game. The fundamental conflict between In-Character-Knowledge and Out-of-Character-Knowledge. Simply put IC knowledge is what your character knows, and OOC knowledge is what the player knows but the character does not. Most role-players develop a strict dichotomy between Character and Player which facilitates Characters being furious at each other and Players continuing to be friendly. This is simply adapting to your new role-playing environment.
What you, as a DM, must do is ask yourself a question: "Do my players have the ability to distinguish between IC Knowledge and OOC Knowledge effectively?"
In this instance, your Paladin Player seems to be having difficulty doing that. The Paladin doesn't know that the body has been robbed (or as he would put it "defiled"), but the Player does. The Player has a problem, the character does not because he is unaware. The Player's anger is bleeding into his Character's behaviour. I have a name for this and call it "Player Bleed." This is where the emotions and values of the Player "bleed" into the Character. All players have problems with this to varying degrees. Your Paladin's player seems to be having a difficult time with Player Bleed.
So either:
1) The player can mature and continue playing as before; or
2) He can't, and you have to adapt.
If you are reduced to option 2, here is what is typically done. When the rogue (or any other character for that matter) goes off by himself to do something secretive, you and the secretive player leave the game table and hash it out. Keep track of how many rounds elapse as he is doing this. Once the secretive player's desires are fufilled (hopefully this should not take longer than 5-10 minutes), you return to the group and find out what they do during the time that the secretive player is alone.
Another option is to pass notes between Players and DM.
Some DM's choose to do what I have described above even if there is not a problem with IC and OOC knowledge or Player Bleed. They do it to preserve a sense of mystery. I am one such DM.
Some may throw out that old Hitchcock quote that Suspense is better than Surprise, but I personally prefer surprise. |
*** A Forgotten Realms Addict since 1990 ***
Treasures of the Past, a Second Edition Play-by-Post game for and by Candlekeep Sages--http://www.rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=52011 |
|
|
|
Ragge
Acolyte
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 21:18:09
|
| Thanks guys, it seems like it should be easy enough. I like the idea of players being able to do things secretively just didn't know how to go about it. But this should do well. Although I'm sure the paladin is going to always be paranoid now. Heh, oh well. |
|
|
|
Kuje
Great Reader
USA
7915 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 21:48:20
|
| Note: Walker said what I was saying, but he said it in a longer reply. :) |
For some of us, books are as important as almost anything else on earth. What a miracle it is that out of these small, flat, rigid squares of paper unfolds world after world, worlds that sing to you, comfort and quiet and excite you... Books are full of the things that you don't get in real life - wonderful, lyrical language, for instance, right off the bat. - Anne Lamott, Bird by Bird
Scribe for the Candlekeep Compendium |
|
|
|
WalkerNinja
Senior Scribe
USA
577 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 22:18:35
|
Noted. Sub-note: Walker was writing his reply prior to the time that you posted yours.  |
*** A Forgotten Realms Addict since 1990 ***
Treasures of the Past, a Second Edition Play-by-Post game for and by Candlekeep Sages--http://www.rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=52011 |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
|
|
WalkerNinja
Senior Scribe
USA
577 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 22:22:35
|
| I discussed Player Bleed above, but what is more common in my game is "Character Bleed." This is when characteristics or behaviours from previous characters (possibly favorite characters) bleed over into your current character. This is particularly bad with one of my players who previously played a very devious, very evil rogue, but is now playing a wide eyed NG wizard's apprentice. Whenever he starts setting up a particularly wily or wicked trap/plan/machination, I say softly "Character Bleed?" In so doing, I have saved the lives of many wealthy NPC's. |
*** A Forgotten Realms Addict since 1990 ***
Treasures of the Past, a Second Edition Play-by-Post game for and by Candlekeep Sages--http://www.rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=52011 |
|
|
|
WalkerNinja
Senior Scribe
USA
577 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 22:23:54
|
| Good point Charles! A Paladin can be a good example and guiding force without being in charge of everybody's business. |
*** A Forgotten Realms Addict since 1990 ***
Treasures of the Past, a Second Edition Play-by-Post game for and by Candlekeep Sages--http://www.rpol.net/game.cgi?gi=52011 |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 22:30:07
|
quote:
Originally posted by WalkerNinja
Good point Charles! A Paladin can be a good example and guiding force without being in charge of everybody's business.
Right, I see paladins as leading by example...but to be fair, maybe this particular character DOES like to butt into other people's business, that's just what he does. Otherwise I'm not sure that a paladin has an obligation to *make* people behave, at least if the crimes in question are on the minor side. Besides, it is clearcut in the situation you described that looting the body was "immoral"? Is it worse than what they just did--killing him? Think about that.
Lastly, I agree with the sentiments expressed by Kuje and yourself--good posts.  |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
Edited by - Rinonalyrna Fathomlin on 10 Jan 2007 22:31:44 |
|
|
|
Faraer
Great Reader
3308 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 22:30:46
|
Why is this paladin knowingly associating with a thief in the first place?
What was the objection to looting this body? |
|
|
|
Ragge
Acolyte
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 23:07:31
|
it's kind of like this...
The dead body in question was somebody that didn't HAVE to die, but he ended up not wanting to nagotiate and so they had to kill him. The Paladin felt bad that they had to take that course and therefore wanted the body left alone.
And he is partied with a thief because this is the first thing we have ever done and I wanted them to have fun with whatever characters they wanted to try and try the RP factor towards each other. It's sort of a "forced" party, story wise. It has worked out very well and is extremely fun, no one is complaining. The conflict between the paladin and the rogue is actually quite humorous and fun for the most part.
I also should clarify that the player wasn't mean to the other player, the paladin PC was showing it towards the rogue PC through other actions and things. In the Paladins defense he was trying not to show his disapointment in the character, it just sort of "bled" through. He isn't annoying anyone or making anyone mad though.
and also he isn't trying to be the moral police or anything , the player is just really playing up the LG alignment
|
Edited by - Ragge on 10 Jan 2007 23:16:05 |
|
|
|
Kaladorm
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1176 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 23:22:28
|
quote:
Originally posted by Faraer
Why is this paladin knowingly associating with a thief in the first place?
What was the objection to looting this body?
I'll chalk that one up to 2E habits and won't take offence this time at rogues being branded as thieves
Firstly, looting corpses is a fairly common thing out in the wilderness and in adventuring parties. Many good aligned characters should have no qualms about looting enemy corpses, especially if they are fighting towards a larger goal.
One thing that is unlikely however is looting corpses simply 'found', and not enemies that were killed by the party (monsters yes).
I find it hard to believe that the Paladin would be so against the looting of a corpse, but obviously did not see fit to bury the dead man (unless the rogue dug him up, in which case the paladin is quite right to be annoyed, note I say the paladin, not the paladins player). On a scale of respect for enemies, burying the dead would come far before looting the corpse, and there would be no reason not to loot an enemy but to leave him fully armed and armoured lying in the middle of wherever it was he was killed |
|
|
|
Rinonalyrna Fathomlin
Great Reader
USA
7106 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 23:34:35
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kaladorm
I find it hard to believe that the Paladin would be so against the looting of a corpse, but obviously did not see fit to bury the dead man (unless the rogue dug him up, in which case the paladin is quite right to be annoyed, note I say the paladin, not the paladins player). On a scale of respect for enemies, burying the dead would come far before looting the corpse, and there would be no reason not to loot an enemy but to leave him fully armed and armoured lying in the middle of wherever it was he was killed
Wow, great point--I didn't even think of that. It's not stated or even implied in the topic post that this dead person got buried. I mean, if you are going to kill a person and not even respect his body enough to bury it, why make such a fuss about taking his lunch money? |
"Instead of asking why we sleep, it might make sense to ask why we wake. Perchance we live to dream. From that perspective, the sea of troubles we navigate in the workaday world might be the price we pay for admission to another night in the world of dreams."
--Richard Greene (letter to Time) |
|
|
|
Ragge
Acolyte
USA
23 Posts |
Posted - 10 Jan 2007 : 23:35:37
|
I am getting alot out of this thread but again I just want to say the more pressing issue for the game I am involved in was the secretive part. Otherwise the group really has no qualms. Like I said we are just starting out so we may be acting out the characters to the extremes. But we have to feel it out... :)
but thanks to everyone that is offering advice, none of which falls upon deaf ears! |
|
|
|
Kaladorm
Master of Realmslore
United Kingdom
1176 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2007 : 00:48:53
|
Yes I realised as I was typing the post that we had strayed a little .
With regards to secrecy, it can be possible but it can also be really hard to do. I played a rogue who was, essentially, an assassin, scout and thief. My DM used to hand me notes etc, and tried to keep things as secretive as possible, but given our play style and group it was time consuming and a bit of a hassle. In particular when scouting if he found anything in a dungeon (whilst the rest of the party were waiting) I'd get a list of what was there, and the chance to pocket anything first before announcing it. Perfectly acceptable behaviour for a character, but other players don't really like it when your character seems to get all the new stuff.
Eventually the other players (not characters!) suspected this rogue of everything that ever happened, and were constantly moaning about stealing etc. Despite the fact he never stole from them (again if the DM said by the way deduct 50 gold from your character sheet, despite the character not knowing, all the players 'would' and they'd not be happy).
One player in a particular had such a hard time that his character (and the next two) for no apparent reason seemed to hate my rogue character. Now the current incarnation hates my paladin character  .
It really depends on your play group but I have to say after about 4 years I've accepted that keeping any kind of secret or 'non-standard' character (I'm good, I help people who need help, I care lots about spells/nature/my god/my weapon,...) isn't going to happen in this group. It's not necessarily a bad thing but if your players can't handle those kind of secrets then it'll be a lot of work to try and foster that environment.
One particular environment where secrets work well is a PBeM game, where you can email everyone, or just the DM etc.
Best of luck anyway |
|
|
|
Charles Phipps
Master of Realmslore
1425 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2007 : 02:34:35
|
I make it a general rule that as long as it's not ridiculously over the top (i.e. a Paladin associating with a bunch of CE Blackguards) that Paladins can have reasons to associate with disreputable characters to some extent. Most specifically, that Paladins have an obligation to the greater good and prevailing law by the player characters doing far more good than they do wicked.
I always felt the Paladin class worked best when they ever STRIVED to better the world and themselves as opposed to being perfect in all things already. |
My Blog: http://unitedfederationofcharles.blogspot.com/
|
|
|
|
Wooly Rupert
Master of Mischief
USA
36961 Posts |
Posted - 11 Jan 2007 : 03:05:33
|
Another note about secrecy in the game: it works both ways. The DM is just as free to pass notes around. Say one player makes a Sense Motive check and the others don't -- pass that player a note. And so on...
When I used to play (it's been quite some time), I used to sometimes pass the DM a note just saying "Hi!" And he would return the favor -- doing notes at odd intervals, particularly when it was nothing important, meant that the important notes didn't draw that much attention. There was no "Ooh, a note, what did I miss?" from anyone, because we all passed notes back and forth to the DM. |
Candlekeep Forums Moderator
Candlekeep - The Library of Forgotten Realms Lore
http://www.candlekeep.com -- Candlekeep Forum Code of Conduct
I am the Giant Space Hamster of Ill Omen! |
|
|
|
Hoondatha
Great Reader
USA
2450 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2007 : 01:42:56
|
Somewhat off topic, but the mention of burying the dead/respecting the dead reminded me of something I learned in class yesterday. The Sasanian Empire (modern Iran and Iraq, started from 226 CE, destroyed during the rise of Islam) believed that the mortal life was a battleground between two essentially equal deities (good and evil). They had very strict purity standards, and one of them was that a dead body was left out in the open to be eaten by vultures. You didn't bury it, because that would spread its taint into the earth. (This religion was Zoroastrianism)
Maybe the paladin was Zoroastrian.... |
Doggedly converting 3e back to what D&D should be...
Sigh... And now 4e as well. |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2007 : 09:58:54
|
quote:
Originally posted by Kaladorm
I find it hard to believe that the Paladin would be so against the looting of a corpse, but obviously did not see fit to bury the dead man (unless the rogue dug him up, in which case the paladin is quite right to be annoyed, note I say the paladin, not the paladins player).
LOL! |
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
|
|
|
Ergdusch
Master of Realmslore
Germany
1720 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2007 : 10:06:25
|
quote:
Originally posted by Ragge
I am getting alot out of this thread but again I just want to say the more pressing issue for the game I am involved in was the secretive part. Otherwise the group really has no qualms. Like I said we are just starting out so we may be acting out the characters to the extremes. But we have to feel it out... :)
but thanks to everyone that is offering advice, none of which falls upon deaf ears!
Hi Ragge!
I have kept my thoughts to myself so far. But there are a few things, or actually it s only thing, that I would like to advice you to do.
However you go about this business, talk it over with your players. Let them be part of he decission cause it is their game as well as it is yours. If there is no concensus that can be agreed on you as the DM should make the final call but until then, take them with you on the journey of deciding how to go about this 'problem'.
For that matter I would like to draw your attention to these two 'save my game' articles from the WOTC site dealing with secrecy at the game table linked here and here. Might be of help to you.
And on a personal note: I always found it hard to dm with 'notes passed around' cause in the games where i used this it ended up that more was done and said (or for that matter 'not said' anymore) by notes. After all they are supposed to play as a group and as a bunch of individuals meeting for various solo-adventures. But that might be just my bad experience leading to this point of view.
Thanks for letting me speak!
Ergdusch |
"Das Gras weht im Wind, wenn der Wind weht." |
Edited by - Ergdusch on 12 Jan 2007 10:14:28 |
|
|
|
boddynock
Learned Scribe
Belgium
258 Posts |
Posted - 12 Jan 2007 : 11:20:40
|
I use 2 methods for such problems. The first one is that I take the player (in this case the rogue) seperately in a room to speak with him in private. Another method I use is with small notes. The roque write a note where he tells what he want to do. I make a roll to see if he can do it secretly. If the roll is good, the rogue got the loot.
I also have to agree with Kaladorm's statement that it is strange that the paladin has problems with the looting of the dead guy, but didn't give him a proper burial.
Now about etnic moral and looting: In egyptian culture, stealing from the death (look to pyramids) was something very evil. Breaking into a tomb to steal the departed treasures is something that a good character of that culture doens't do. Taking weapons from fallen enemies/comrades in battle is something different of course, because you take something to survive. To know if looting is an evil act or not, I think you have to see every situation appart. :) |
|
|
| |
Topic |
|
"I hope the Paladin didn't see!"
