Log in

No account? Create an account
D&D 3E
Living With The Lawbreaker 
17th-Feb-2007 01:46 am
I'm playing a half-Battle-dragon cleric/fighter with a heavily enchanted fullblade named Starcleaver that he's got several feats for. It's a fairly high-powered campaign. I have the opportunity to upgrade Starcleaver to an intelligent item, and I'd love to give it a dedicated purpose. Since the character is basically a samurai, seeking out honorable combat wherever he can find it, I thought that an appropriate purpose would be "convert or destroy the dishonorable".

Only one problem - another member of the party is a rogue with a ring of invisibility. Up until now, the cleric's been satisfied casting Invisibility Purge every time he notices the rogue slip his ring on. The DM feels that with a dedicated purpose, though, things would have to step up a notch.

I'm looking for a way to make this work. The only idea I've thought of so far is that the cleric's trying to somehow convert the rogue through example, but that seems like a copout. Any advice is appreciated.
17th-Feb-2007 07:35 am (UTC)
Is punching him in the throat and taking the ring an option?



You could try challenging him to a honorable contest, with some treasure you have the s/he desires, against his ring. To make it fair, you could make it a bare-knuckle brawl, without your shiny killstick or any other items besides your fists.

Depending on where you fight, and what your setup is, you can take his ring, and refrain from any dishonorable tactics.
17th-Feb-2007 09:06 am (UTC)
Yeah, If I were a rogue, I'd take any challenge of combat from a half-dragon fighter. Your options are compromise, resort to name-calling, or ditch him. Personally, I think it's your ethos that's a tad extreme in this example. You can't expect everyone to be as completely and awesomely honorable as you, especially if you want a sneak in the team. The Knight section of PHB2 has some tips on tolerating less-than-honorable types while maintaining your honor.
17th-Feb-2007 04:05 pm (UTC)
First, I'd like to point out that this is a dangerous place to take the game. It's the type of thing that would work swimmingly well in a novel, but in a game, it's much more likely to cause bickering and hurt feelings. It's not fun when my character is bossing around your character or trying to kill him because he's "not honorable enough" etc.

Anyway, if the rogue were to swear fealty to the samurai and be discreet about his "dishonorable" behavior...and when caught doing his dishonorable thing, apologize/promise to work harder at upholding his honor...then Starcleaver wouldn't present a problem.

Whether the rogue's player would consent to this new dynamic is another matter entirely. Personally, I'd rather start rolling up new characters than turn my PC into another PC's cohort like that.
18th-Feb-2007 02:44 am (UTC)
So what's a specific item purpose that wouldn't disrupt the game? I have to think that since the items have their own section in the DMG, they were supposed to be usable by players.
17th-Feb-2007 04:06 pm (UTC) - Hold on just a second...
What exactly is this rogue doing? Is he stealing from the party, or is he using the ring to gain advantage over your mutual enemies?

Ham-fisted enforcement of honor and/or alignment is only going to be met with resistance, and it can bleed into out-of-game tension. Even the samurai knew that there were things in this world they could not change (and believe me, in the past six months I've done quite a bit of research on samurai). If you want to bring the rogue to your character's philosophy/ethos, your best bet is to lead by example in the hop that he follows. It is NOT a copout, but an opportunity to get into some really good role-playing.
18th-Feb-2007 02:48 am (UTC) - Re: Hold on just a second...
He's using it for the party. This was probably the most helpful comment so far, thanks a lot.
17th-Feb-2007 04:41 pm (UTC) - Compromise
D&D is a group game. Don't do something that will disrupt the group. Period.

But here are some questions to ask yourself:

1) How would you (or your character) define "honor" or "honorable?" It's a pretty complex and loaded term. Is it possible that your character may not consider the rogue and his doings dishonorable?

2) If your character wishes to take up a quest/oath/whatever that would require him to kill one of the other party members, then why the bloody hell are these two traveling together??.

But if you really feel your character has to move in such a direction that he can no longer work with the rest of the party, then he should leave the party. That's it. If you don't want him to leave, then you have to make some compromises so that the party can work together, and that might require giving up your intelligent item.
17th-Feb-2007 06:52 pm (UTC) - Re: Compromise
Agreed with Highbulp on this.

Gamewise, I can't see the "honorable" intellegent sword bringing the party together here. The option you might have here is if you were willing to pick an intellegent weapon with a different personality/ethos. You still get your intellegent weapon while you aren't pressed to slay the party rogue.

On a comment with Highbulp's comment #1, concider this: If the party rogue is facing an enemy rogue, is that an "honorable" match up?
17th-Feb-2007 05:27 pm (UTC)
Character conflict, I see. In a non-evil game, no less.

IMO, one of your characters has to leave. Not because we don't like them. Not because they died, but because there is no logical reason for two characters who are adamantly opposed to one another to adventure together.

Samurai: "Stop sneaking around and stabbing people in the back."
Rogue: "Go fuck yourself."

>_> Sound about right?
18th-Feb-2007 02:56 am (UTC)
No, it sounds nothing close to right. The Cleric has had a tentative working relationship with the rogue thus far, with no more conflict than the occasional Invisibility Purge. Which is what their relationship is, because they were hired to investigate something. I'm trying to work the weapon into the party, not vice-versa. mHe'd rather not upgrade the weapon than cause dissention in the ranks.
17th-Feb-2007 06:44 pm (UTC)
I feel sorry for whoever plays the rogue in your game. If some one in my games tried something like that, I would find a new game.
18th-Feb-2007 02:59 am (UTC)
Tried something like what? Playing a character with a moral code in a game with a rogue? I was looking for a Specific Item Purpose that would suit the character without creating in-fighting, not seeking out a way to stick it to another player. It's kinda insulting to insinuate I was.
18th-Feb-2007 03:03 am (UTC)
Heh. They're a little more amicable than that, the cleric usually just casts Invisi-purge and encourages the rogue to "Stand like a man! Your bravery and courage will see you through!"
19th-Feb-2007 07:29 pm (UTC)
Im trying to figure out what the issue is?

This also all depends on your alignment of course.
23rd-Feb-2007 04:21 am (UTC)
I would strongly urge you to not let your item go all PVP on the rogue. That really pisses me off as a player, and I bet I'm not the only one.

How about just "convert the dishonorable"? I'm not too familiar with dedicated powers, though, so I don't know if that would work.

Maybe he could convince the rogue to only use the ring for scouting, not for fighting? (Not likely, I know, but try?)

Good luck!
This page was loaded Apr 19th 2019, 8:45 am GMT.