| 3 people marked this as a favorite. |
Cool, and your character would rise as a skeletal champion. A quick will save vs his channel energy save DC would decide if you're his agent or actually free willed to do as you wish.YMMV but I'm glad I'm not part of your party. I would not want to play that kind of plot and if a GM surprises me with it I might either just walk away or first kill my pc by attacking the Lich.
Form everything you tell you only need the lich to show the PCs how weak they are and that they need him to help them.
No save needed. Time is too precious to game with bad GMs.
It is kind of cute that everyone is throwing a fit over something that should only take 30 minutes.As a general rule, posting in the advice forum and then mocking those who give you advice is a poor method of operation.
It's not about everything "going as planned". In point of fact, you should really think about what you wrote-- adventures aren't about things going as planned, and neither is GMing.
You asked about pitfalls and problems in this venture. The biggest pitfall is that how you're handling this situation is wildly different from how the average player will. To you, it's entirely a logical question, a question of "well, the PCs can't win, so attacking would be stupid". You really drive that point home with a lot of the descriptors you use; nonsensical, "absolute worst", etc.
But to your players-- and just as importantly, to their characters-- the stupid thing may well be to deal with the lich.
You want to know how to handle a PC attacking this lich? That starts with figuring out why the PC is attacking. Re-reading the OP it seems like you actually do have a Paladin in the party (probably; the post isn't clear)-- which means that you need to figure out how to run this without breaking the Paladin code. Because entirely by that code, the party (or at least one member) actually does have to refuse the lich at best, or outright attack him at worst. That's not being "nonsensically stupid", that's following the restrictions set out by his class.
What's going to be thirty minutes to you is not going to be thirty minutes to your party, unless they just shrug and accept being blatantly railroaded along. At the least they're going to be suspicious, they'll probably have a great many questions, and if they're smart they'll be Spellcrafting every single spell he casts to 'protect' them, bargaining to bring the Archon along, and probably much, much more.
Half of the people here say, "Yup, if the PCs act like idiots, they should die like idiots." The other half jumps the gun to say I'm a bad gm.
I've already stated the Paladins code is ignored here in my previous post. His paladinhood has GM protection from this event. Some people will acknowledge that, others will complain that I didn't build my entire mega-adventure's cool-stuff around one person.This character's entire role in the story, like any other powerful character in nearly any other story where they show up, is to offer exposition, a more concrete goal and to set the heroes on their journey.
When you enter a game and some obvious "go here, do this" hints are dropped, do you say, "Ok, lets see what cool stuff the GM has in store for us," and then go on the adventure or do you say, "Na, I'm good. I'mma sit in town."
The plague accosting the town will last for 30 days as a continual event. For each day the PCs fail to go try to resolve the event, they have to make a stability check to not accrue unrest. After 30 days, the plague mysteriously stops, and we move into book 3 of Kingmaker.
I've already told them that if they want they can bring in a B-Team.
The current dramatis personae is
Gnoll Paladin
Human Cleric
Human Magus
Ratfolk Rogue (Unchained)
Gnomish Summoner
Half-Elf Arcane Trickster
But, they could bring in a B-team that completely replaces that composition.
I have contingency plans if the PCs make bad decisions.
If they die to the Lich, to the dangers that exist on his demi-plane or of the major hazard they are going to discover then they gain a bloody skeletal champion template (lose 3 class levels, gain 2HD and some cool special abilities, but are otherwise treated as your original class level) and likely continue on their journey.
Can the paladin remain a paladin as a skeletal champion if it comes to that? It boils down to if evil creatures can turn good. Perhaps to humor himself the Lich releases the paladin to do as he pleases. Perhaps whenever he uses lay on hands he hurts himself but the effect still goes through. Something. Adventurers are the exceptions to many of the rules that govern life in Golarion.
If it is cool enough and balanced enough, the GM might let it work, and really, who wouldn't think it is completely bad-ass for a bloody skeletal champion to be lawful good. Sure, they could raise dead him later, but just think about how ironic his existence would be.
I use the general rule of horror in more or less everything. If you don't make time for the silly stuff, then the serious things have no meaning. Likewise, if the silliness or seriousness is everything, then both lose all meaning.
I, for one, don't think you are being a bad GM.
If the players want to run off and do random stuff, that should be assumed... players love to explore their boundaries.
I would just have the Lich NUKE whoever attacked him. He isn't good, after all.
Strike the fear of god into the players, remind them that levels mean something, if a level 5-6 rushes a level 11+, he's likely not going to make it.
Getting them to play along with a planned plot can be tough... if you figure it out, let us know how you did it. ;D
I, for one, don't think you are being a bad GM.
If the players want to run off and do random stuff, that should be assumed... players love to explore their boundaries.
I would just have the Lich NUKE whoever attacked him. He isn't good, after all.
Strike the fear of god into the players, remind them that levels mean something, if a level 5-6 rushes a level 11+, he's likely not going to make it.
Getting them to play along with a planned plot can be tough... if you figure it out, let us know how you did it. ;D
Or tell them out of game that it is a awesome railroad, pehaps even a rollercoster, and there is deathsentence if you get of the train.
Edit:And if you want the situation to be serious, like the titel says, dont Fist bumb.
The lich is likely a busy guy. Who's to say that he doesn't have several meetings that day? Illustrate his power to the party by having some other uninvolved person/group blow it with the lich and the lich turns them into dust with the wave of a hand.
You've now given them a look at what he's capable of and they can then make in informed judgement as to whether or not doing something stupid is a good idea or not.
|
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
A character that indescriminately slaughters (or attempts to) anything that is evil, regardless of whether or not it is actively engaged in evil isn't a palasin, he's a serial killer.
As for who is the greater evil, from what I can tell, the lich seems to largely be content to chill in his demiplane, while the apprentice is out actively causing harm to others. Their relative power levels don't matter, the apprentice is the greater evil because he's actively evil.
My suggestion: the lich disables the paladin without killing him. Petrification would be perfect. Maybe he even gives the party a scroll to un-petrify him, on the.condition they don't do so until they have left the lich's demiplane.
As mentioned above by other posters:
- He's a lich. He's going to see this sort of action occasionally as a matter of course.
- He's a lich. He's smart enough to predict how his chosen tools will behave.
- He's a lich. He's smart enough to realize that this tool will ultimately be more useful dead than alive.
- He's a lich. He's going to have contingencies.
So I like the idea of toying with the paladin. Repulsion, heightened Protection from Good or Magic Circle againt Good, Antipathy, or Project Image, should all be good for a laugh. Followed quickly by Dismissal or Banishment.
Then wrap up the polite negotiations with the rest of the party quickly and pop them back home for their tearful reunion with the no-doubt much beloved paladin.
Edit: I like Kthulu's petrification idea too.
It is kind of cute that everyone is throwing a fit over something that should only take 30 minutes.As a general rule, posting in the advice forum and then mocking those who give you advice is a poor method of operation.
It's not about everything "going as planned". In point of fact, you should really think about what you wrote-- adventures aren't about things going as planned, and neither is GMing.
You asked about pitfalls and problems in this venture. The biggest pitfall is that how you're handling this situation is wildly different from how the average player will. To you, it's entirely a logical question, a question of "well, the PCs can't win, so attacking would be stupid". You really drive that point home with a lot of the descriptors you use; nonsensical, "absolute worst", etc.
But to your players-- and just as importantly, to their characters-- the stupid thing may well be to deal with the lich.
You want to know how to handle a PC attacking this lich? That starts with figuring out why the PC is attacking. Re-reading the OP it seems like you actually do have a Paladin in the party (probably; the post isn't clear)-- which means that you need to figure out how to run this without breaking the Paladin code. Because entirely by that code, the party (or at least one member) actually does have to refuse the lich at best, or outright attack him at worst. That's not being "nonsensically stupid", that's following the restrictions set out by his class.
What's going to be thirty minutes to you is not going to be thirty minutes to your party, unless they just shrug and accept being blatantly railroaded along. At the least they're going to be suspicious, they'll probably have a great many questions, and if they're smart they'll be Spellcrafting every single spell he casts to 'protect' them, bargaining to bring the Archon along, and probably much, much more.
You note that this is a "serious situation". Why are you treating something serious with...
I second this. What you think should happen and what will happen are two entirely different things.
I'm running Iron Gods. I expected the PCs to kill the Book 1 end boss. Maybe they would capture her and get some information out of her.
Instead, they almost capture her and release her shortly thereafter (the only reason that this possibility didn't happen is that one particular PC was at the right place at the right time). One PC potentially almost changed to her religion. That....that would have made things interesting in Book 2....
The situation with the lich and the paladin is definitely an issue. The paladin will NEED to know that his paladin code will not be violated by helping the lich (see the "allying with evil in order to stop a greater evil clause) and as a GM you need to get this point across.
As to the Skeletal Champion Paladin: normally, no. Skeletons aren't just evil; they are animated by pure necromantic energy. Similarly to evil outsiders, evilness constitutes their very being. That said, Wrath of the Righteous has rules for redeeming evil creatures, and even features a redeemed evil outsider. So there are rules for it out there somewhere. It's not something I would do as a DM, however.
And to second what others have been saying, do try to be less mocking with your responses. If you ask for advise and only mock those who give it, then why ask for it?
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
just flesh to stone the offender and then tell the PCs he'll return to normal when the adults are done talking.
just flesh to stone the offender and then tell the PCs he'll return to normal when the adults are done talking.
And no fist bump!
Maybe the paladins player wants to adher to the paladin code? Maybe that's why he chose a paladin? It would be a bad move to kill him , or expect him to knowingly ally with a lich.
How come the lich expects him to? He should either deceive him or brute force (geas?) him (though this is again an almost unacceptable GM move) or better yet manipulate him more subtly to do it.
Why can you not use a minion or maybe the hound archon itself as agent for the exposition? Then finding later out that there's a lich behind it all and freeing/rescuing the archon, opposing the lich and in the end maybe confronting and defeating him are much better plot options IMHO.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
If the hound archon is the lich's planar bound thrall, that completely undermines the hound archon's authority. I.e., that hound archon is actually compromised by magic, and his word isn't worth squat.
I'd interprete "Greater evil" to be subjective - it's based on intent and activity, not power level. If it was supposed to be based on raw power, they'd actually have language about levels or hit dice.
Queen Elvanna is actively seeking to turn Golarion into an ice cube.
Hence, Elvanna, while not the stronger of the two evils, is the greater of the two evils, because she's on the warpath and her CR 30 mom isn't.
The paladin can certainly work with the lich to oppose a mutual enemy that's threatening the paladin's kingdom (the paladin's the actual kingdom ruler in the OP's game, isn't he?), as long as the lich's own activities aren't threatening.
But as a courtesy to the paladin's player, the paladin should be given a head's up ("Unfortunately, you actually need this monster's help"), and NOT from a source that's clearly compromised.
lich: "oh a paladin? things are going to start off swimmingly I know."
| 2 people marked this as a favorite. |
"I'm as displeased to have you here as you are to be here. For both our sakes, lets get down to business...."
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I run a world where there are many adventurers. Not just the current PCs, but hundreds of them, all over the place. Most of them have a bad reputation for being, uh, shall we say, quick on the trigger finger.
So most of my NPCs are very wary when dealing with adventurers.
And my players all know up front that I play the world to win. And the world will win if the players create PCs who test the world in stupid ways. Work together, play smart, and the PCs get to win. But be stupid, and the world will probably win.
To this end, I would have the hound archon deal with this in a quick dialog before they ever get near the lich, something like this:
"OK, the guy we're going to see, he's a lich. I know, I know, liches are evil and must be destroyed. But this guy, he's different. He's actually not too bad. Sure, still evil, but he keeps it under control and does a lot of good stuff too. Enough to earn a stay of execution. At least for now. So don't try to kill him.
Listen. I know you adventurer types. Sir Knucklehead here is already drooling over the chance to smite this lich, and little Miss Takesalot is drooling about looting his still twitching corpse. The rest of you are probably no better. So get that crap out of your head. I said this guy is different. Not your usual garden variety lich. So back off and work with guy. Don't trust him fully, but work with him.
Besides, I've seen him dust groups of adventurers way more experienced than you lot. So don't get yourselves killed here for nothing."
After that speech, if the players can't contain their murder-hobo enthusiasm, the PCs die. Their choice. Heed the warnings and enjoy the adventure, or ignore the warnings and roll new characters.
If the hound archon is the lich's planar bound thrall, that completely undermines the hound archon's authority. I.e., that hound archon is actually compromised by magic, and his word isn't worth squat.
I'd interprete "Greater evil" to be subjective - it's based on intent and activity, not power level.
The paladin can certainly work with the lich to oppose a mutual enemy that's threatening the paladin's kingdom (the paladin's the actual kingdom ruler in the OP's game, isn't he?), as long as the lich's own activities aren't threatening.
But as a courtesy to the paladin's player, the paladin should be given a head's up ("Unfortunately, you actually need this monster's help"), and NOT from a source that's clearly compromised.
Assume that the hound archon is being paid for its service, but is not enslaved by the Lich.
This post gives some interesting information. I'll have to research Baba Yaga and Reign of Winter.
I wouldn't say completely, but yeah i wouldn't trust it.
My interpretation depends a whole lot on how much control the players have over the situation they are getting in. The OP stated that they will be going to a demiplane and accepting the hospitality of a lich. If these are player/character choices with a reasonable amount of knowledge of what they are doing, then if someone chooses to act against the lich, they should indeed face the consequences.
If though, this is done essentially by GM fiat, I am less ok with that happening. Forcing PCs into a situation where they feel (right or wrong) that they have no choice but to oppose an overwhelmingly powerful foe isn't cool. Also, I don't think the Hound Archon's opinion holds any water, since the Paladin probably can't know how much free will it has, and there is precedent for some outsiders departing from their typical alignment. Additionally, giving the Paladin a free 'get out of fall card' for this situation doesn't help either. A Paladin should do what they believe is right because they believe it is right, not because they are afraid of falling. And yes, fighting an opponent you can't hope to beat because it is the right thing to do is the essence of heroism.
Lastly, I'd offer a more general caution. I think everyone agrees that Paladins can be trick and there are a lot of different interpretations about how they should behave. Hopefully, a player and a GM can make sure they understand each others views and reach an equitable decision on how to handle issues before a player even chooses to make a Paladin. This obviously hasn't happened when a new GM replaces another one. Don't assume you are on the same page just because you have seen the interaction in the campaign, have a talk with the player and make sure you understand each other and everyone is happy before you take over the game.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
He also has no interest in actually fighting the PCs or harming their kingdom. Well, until the Whispering Tyrant wakes back up, at which point all bets are off.That doesn't matter. Evil is evil! If you're a hero, you don't only care about evil that's coming directly for you and the ones you love, you care about evil in general. You don't say, "Oh, no, it's cool, lich, you can slaughter the next town over, that's cool, just not my village, ok?"This.
Even if the lich has no interest in killing the party, the paladin might still have an interest in killing the lich."I'd rather die in battle than make a deal with a lich" IS a thing.
Only to lawful stupid Paladins. There is no glory, honor or justice in throwing your life away in a battle you clearly cannot win for no cause and no gain to the powers of good whatsoever.
This meeting with a lich is the same as if the Paladin had walked through a town and detected evil on a peasant. The peasant and lich may be evil but they have not done anything or are not attempting anything that the Paladin has reason to oppose at this time.
In point of fact the lich is assisting good in opposing another evil which even the Paladin code says can happen on a limited basis.
This lich is in his own hole, keeping the deals he makes and is making a point of not attacking or molesting anything the party cares about or is protecting.
Will the Paladin note every damn thing he can about the lich, it's possible powers and weaknesses, lair, guards, abilities and items for possible future destruction? You damn well better believe he will.
But committing 'suicide by evil cop' should never be in a Paladins code unless the Paladin and player are playing lawful stupid. And if they are, why would a deity/the powers of good have imbued this idiot with divine powers to start with?
Honestly your best bet is to have the lich magiced to have either undetectable alignment or a false alignment spell to detect as good and undetectable lie spells going. Then have it act totally 'lawful good' during the meeting while using projected image to appear to be there but it really is not.
It will be polite, considerate, gracious and kind. It will have multiple walls of force between itself and the party to avoid any 'accidental unpleasantness' that may happen. It will lay out it's offer and give guarantee's that if it shirks it's end in any way it suffers a penalty, like letting the Paladin smite it.
Then have it stand by the agreement 110%. Even have it go above the agreement and perhaps arrange to have something the characters care for back in the world aided (money for the orphanarium, food for the starving etc). But above all it will do NOTHING that could possibly be construed as offensive or evil in any way that could give the paladin any slight reason to smite it. It will use the paladins/good characters own honor or codes to bind them and in this instance it actually is for the good of all. It just so happens his goals and the players are identical for now.
Evil will do most anything to get it's way. If it happens that playing 'good' works best there is no reason not to.
Lich: Ladies and gentlemen, welcome to my home! Please come in and find yourself a comfortable seat around my table. I assure you that all the refreshments for this meeting are most safe and hearty to consume. In fact I have gone to lengths to make sure I have a dazzling array of delicacies that I hope you will all like. Note that should you choose to decline my repast I will understand and will in no way be insulted.
I feel it only fair to declare that all the material items in the room are enchanted and should the need arise, and I pray that is shall not, will animate to my defense. Also those numerous statues you see around my halls are actually various golems of my own creations. Like wise I have taken the liberty of encasing my side of the room with illusions and walls of force in a pattern of my own design. Whilst I am sure you have the power to eventually penetrate my defenses it would not be in time enough to prevent me from fleeing and collapsing this dimension upon my leaving.
Lastly the image you see before you is merely illusion. I am, in full truth, located elsewhere and observing the scene via magic. Even if you should get through my defenses you would still need to find where I actually am in this fortress and as previously stated I will be long gone before then.
I would like to make it absolutely and totally clear however that I do NOT wish that to happen. An altercation between us would be most counterproductive and rash and I know that this meeting can help both of our goals and at the same time not compromise the honor, codes or ethos of anyone here.
Be assured I will give you no reason to assault me during this suggested joint venture and in fact every real and valid reason to make our cooperation as brief and profitable as possible.
Party: *Stares open mouthed*
| 5 people marked this as a favorite. |
Why are good adventurers always idiots?
You don't like the massively evil lich? Don't deal with him. Walk out. As a level 6-8 adventurer you can't touch the lich let alone kill him in his own plane.
As a matter of fact, I'd have the Lich say that at the start of the meeting. "Don't like what I'm offering? You're free to go."
Its like having a Devil show up and offer you a contract. Trying to KILL the devil is stupid, you just refuse to deal with him. As a Paladin, your code isn't to KILL every source of evil you encounter. When offered conversation, you converse. When offered steel, you match with steel.
Simply killing anything that doesn't match your beliefs is an evil act in my GM book.
And yes, fighting an opponent you can't hope to beat because it is the right thing to do is the essence of heroism.
suicide attacks are not martyrdom.
Why are good adventurers always idiots?
You don't like the massively evil lich? Don't deal with him. Walk out. As a level 6-8 adventurer you can't touch the lich let alone kill him in his own plane.
As a matter of fact, I'd have the Lich say that at the start of the meeting. "Don't like what I'm offering? You're free to go."
Its like having a Devil show up and offer you a contract. Trying to KILL the devil is stupid, you just refuse to deal with him. As a Paladin, your code isn't to KILL every source of evil you encounter. When offered conversation, you converse. When offered steel, you match with steel.
Simply killing anything that doesn't match your beliefs is an evil act in my GM book.
Where Does the always come from? This situation havent even happend yet.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
I'm in the team of using a middle man and revealing it was the lich all along later. For one, I don't see why such a powerful near demigod like being would care to have weaklings enter his domain, and likely take a swipe at him. They're likely not worthy enough to hear him speak, let alone see him.
You could have the archon not mention the lich at all and send them after the apprentice. I would probably trust an archon more if it didn't talk about working for a lich at all. Granted, it seems like its meant just to be a moment of cool scenery, but that moment could be had after the apprentice is dealt with.
The lich teleports all of them to his domain and is like, "as a reward for doing as I commanded, I'd like to say thanks... but I won't cause I'm evil!"
Middleman would keep party from attacking for no reason, bypass initial need for paladin work around, and you can still have lich moment later.
And yes, fighting an opponent you can't hope to beat because it is the right thing to do is the essence of heroism.suicide attacks are not martyrdom.
Indeed. There's a rather substantial difference between being a situation where all you need to do is not start a fight, and being in a situation where your options are "submit or die."
And even in the latter case, surrender might still be the correct option for a paladin. After all, you can't resume the good fight if you're dead.
(I'd expect a paladin of Iomedae or Torag to fight to the death. I think that's even part of Iomedae's code. But I'd expect a paladin of Abadar to negotiate the terms of his lawful surrender (much a like a general negotiated the surrender of his army).)
@ Taku Ooka Nin - the hound archon getting paid for being the lich's planar binding lackey doesn't actually improve the situation. It just means the lich won on the opposed charisma check, and may be paying up to avoid a possible reprisal later.
|
What happens if the lich just doesn't appear as a lich, but a bumbling, eccentric wizard, who is willing to pay well for the services of adventurers? Ask for the adventurers to bring his wayward apprentice to him, for appropriate chatisement. A little non detection, alter self, and we have an elderly gentleman who just wants that apprentice who has been doing such NAUGHTY things back..
Don't forget to serve them muffins and tea!
A paladin is willing to die if it makes a difference
Otherwise it's just dumb. The paladin code doesn't compel him to fight clearly superior foes if the only result is the death of the paladin because this is actively detrimental to his companions and the cause of good in general.
There's also the fact that as-is the Lich's apprentice IS the greater evil.
"Greater evil" does not mean "the more powerful evil character". If that were the case allying with a fellow PC to fight goblins at 1st level would result in a fall (CR 1 evil PC vs CR 1/3 Goblins).
As this is clearly f~#*ing stupid, that's not the case.
"Greater evil" is the evil that poses a greater immediate threat.
If you ally with a level 10 Neutral Evil thief (his only evil acts are, for the most part, thievery) to defeat a level 9 Antipaladin who's going around slaughtering people, the level 9 Antipaladin is still the GREATER EVIL.
Likewise temporarily allying with the CR 20 Lich who's chillin' on his throne as the Prince of Hell Air and will continue to do so for the foreseeable future (if he ever stops doing so, since the Whispering Tyrant being released is an unlikely event, at least in this century) to defeat the CR 9 Necromancer who's terrorizing the countryside is not a problem because an ACTIVE evil is always a GREATER evil compared to an inactive one.
If you ally with a level 10 Neutral Evil thief (his only evil acts are, for the most part, thievery) to defeat a level 9 Antipaladin who's going around slaughtering people, the level 9 Antipaladin is still the GREATER EVIL.
I'm tempted to make a joke about the level 9 Antipaladin being stronger than the level 10 Rogue by any metric anyway.
not Unchained Rogue anyways
Note I didn't say Rogue, I said thief. =p
Coud be an Alchemist for all you know. Or a Wizard!
| 4 people marked this as a favorite. |
Deciding to fight an evil that is out of your league is tantamount to killing yourself in some other silly way.
The problem is, if I was a good character, regardless of whether or not I was a Paladin, I wouldn't want to deal with a lich. Heck, I just played through Book 3 of Rise of the Runelords as a Neutral character, and I still wouldn't:
They thanked me later, though. The GM mentioned that if we had made a deal with the pit fiend, it would have returned in a year of in-game time and murdered us as punishment for having seen it in a weakened state. And, he showed us that was not him being sadistic, it was written in the module itself. They realized pretty quickly, you don't make deals with evil, even if you're evil yourself.
If they fail, he will know that he'll have to attempt a surgical strike against his apprentice or hire devils to do the job the next time he is in Dis.
Why do any of this nonsense? A lich could just Planar Ally (which only costs money, which is no object apparently) an outsider that would wipe the floor with the party, so, if the party is able to beat the apprentice, this hypothetical Planar Ally could wipe the floor with the apprentice. Why is he even bothering with the PCs?
He is a plot device.
And that is my objection. He's a plot device that would be problematic for me, and instead of recognizing that and shifting tactics, you're acting as if it's the PC's problem and that they have to go along with what you're doing or else.
If some of the PCs want to throw their lives away, they are welcome to do so. You don't get an audience with Asmodeus, walk into his palace and declare, "Now, villain, you shall die," and expect to survive.
No, but you know what? My good character wouldn't want an audience with Asmodeus. You're framing this like the PCs should feel privileged to have tea with this Lich, rather than not wanting any part of this. What the heck?
I wouldn't attack the lich over tea, I'd refuse to go in the first place.
Someone might be stupid, but that is normal. When he casts a 9th level instant death spell to deal with the offending person, the rest will realize that putting their weapons away and being courteous is the best possible decision.
I would be very frustrated with your railroading, at this point--I would think you need me to talk to this NPC of yours for some story you're trying to tell and I don't roleplay to hear someone tell me a story.
To me it sounds like the lich is a GM pet, that is Best left out of the story.
So this.
Cool, and your character would rise as a skeletal champion. A quick will save vs his channel energy save DC would decide if you're his agent or actually free willed to do as you wish.
No, I'd either make another character, probably an evil one that would actually work in this context, or you'd have one less player, because that's BS.
"Hey, welcome, I'm glad my friend here *fist bumps hound archon* brought you here like I asked.
"Nope, no way. Now I can't even trust Hound Archons." (leave in a hurry)
"With my magic I can obscure you from the worst of what exists in the Darklands, but it just so happens that my agents have traced his minions path.
Nope, never make deals with evil. Their help is always too costly.
The problem is not, "They might attack an unbeatable foe," the problem is that you are forcing them to meet an unbeatable foe they had no option to avoid in the first place.
Taku, you simply want this story to work. As a DM that's fine; you are a story artist.
But, players get to make their choices. They are the protagonists. they are their own character artists.
You have more than enough feedback from this board to see that your player's Paladin is not "just stupid" for immediately fighting a lich of great evil.
Like every Paladin debate, half the players think death for ideals is suitable and half think cunning, grizzled Paladin play is superior.
In the end, you have created a very simple situation in which the party is largely powerless, due to the unbelievable level of power the Lich commands. This, to you, is a necessary story element and to a player may be a railroad. It's their right to jump off the tracks.
Meaningful death for ideals is suitable.
If he stabs himself on the spot ha could achieve a better result as his companions at least have a bigger chance survive.
Dr. Doom the situation.
They meet the lich and they decide to play nice, great. He's cordial but fully confident in not only his capability of handling the good guys but also his complete authority in the situation. You are on his sovereign soil, so by law you are the criminals if you attack.
If they decide to attack, he lets them. They get maybe a round or two of him looking down on them (letting them get it out of their system) and not doing anything in return. If they don't kill him, he asks, "Are you ready to get down to business or do you want to continue this charade?" If they do kill him, then he was a "Doombot". He then steps out of an adjoining room and says the same.
It's cheap, but there are spells that could reasonably duplicate this scenario that a lich would likely use (it could be an illusion, or a golem that has been shaped to look like him, or whatever).
You don't have to kill them to make your point. I agree with most of the above posters that a Paladin isn't likely to sit idly by and sup with a lich. But if they use their resources fighting a fake and then the real one shows up, they might be more willing to talk first.
That said, you could also do something similar but be more sneaky about it. Instead of them needing to agree to work with the lich, have the lich fake his death and say something overly dramatic like "I HAVE FAILED YOU MASTER!" as he dies. And make sure clues are left that lead to his apprentice. When they leave, he comes out of hiding and laughs. Try to make it appear that the bad acting is you and not the lich. At the end, if they succeed, have the lich come out and congratulate them... maybe by giving them payment for services rendered. I'm a big fan of bad guys who really like the good guys and "try to help"... in their own way. :)
And yes, fighting an opponent you can't hope to beat because it is the right thing to do is the essence of heroism.suicide attacks are not martyrdom.
Um, actually, there are many people right here in this world who would say exactly the opposite. Whether we like it or not, suicide attacks ARE a means to achieve martyrdom for some people.
Now, I don't think martyrdom is a worthy goal for an adventurer. Hopefully some players (dare we hope for all players?) can rise to the level of adventurer rather than sink to the level of suicidal martyr when presented with these kinds of scenarios.
And yes, fighting an opponent you can't hope to beat because it is the right thing to do is the essence of heroism.suicide attacks are not martyrdom.Um, actually, there are many people right here in this world who would say exactly the opposite. Whether we like it or not, suicide attacks ARE a means to achieve martyrdom for some people.
Now, I don't think martyrdom is a worthy goal for an adventurer. Hopefully some players (dare we hope for all players?) can rise to the level of adventurer rather than sink to the level of suicidal martyr when presented with these kinds of scenarios.
while it pains me that Islam broke off from Christianity before the pope in the 6th century made suicide a sin, due to people committing suicide attacks upon heathens in the holy land, Paladin's are still based on christian knights, and the alignment scales are based on American Christian values.
And yes, fighting an opponent you can't hope to beat because it is the right thing to do is the essence of heroism.suicide attacks are not martyrdom.
Debatable, but not really my point. Also, fighting a hopeless fight is not the same as a suicide attack, which is typically understood as using suicide as a means/integral to attacking such as strapping on a bomb vest.
I'll freely acknowledge that fighting someone you can't hope to beat isn't always the right thing to do, however, sometimes it is. Sometimes a person of faith would believe that their resistance is more important than their life. One classic example would be fighting a hopeless fight to give others time to flee.
Clearly the OP has tried to make that unnecessary in this case. How successful he is in achieving that, and how successful he is in making sure the players and characters are aware of that is difficult to judge.
However, if the Paladin is faced with a 'join me or die' situation, I would expect the Paladin to die rather than help an evil foe.
Clearly, as the rules itself state, a short term alliance to defeat a pressing evil can be allowable, but with a creature like a very powerful lich that can be extremely problematic, since it is quite likely that such a creature will be scheming to increase its own power....meaning helping it defeat a rival evil could well be supporting the greater evil...I would have to be absolutely sure their was no other way to defeat the apprentice in order for me to team up with the lich.
...and even then I would expect to be cursing his inevitable betrayal.
I'll freely acknowledge that fighting someone you can't hope to beat isn't always the right thing to do, however, sometimes it is. Sometimes a person of faith would believe that their resistance is more important than their life.
except it isn't as it's tantamount to surrendering. fighting an unwinnable battle isn't resistance it's giving in to the inevitability.
One classic example would be fighting a hopeless fight to give others time to flee.
in which case they've "won" when their allies escaped, and the battle wasn't actually unwinnable.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And I don't believe for a second that a lawful good outsider would be cool trusting a lich.
Oh, I think it's possible that a hound archon could trust a lich. It all depends on the lich. But a lich who is a former general for the Whispering Tyrant?!? I'm not sure I'd trust the hound archon's judgment and assume he was under some form of dominion.
I think the OP is much better off just having the job given to them by the archon in the first place. He can say he's working for a powerful patron and not identify who he is. Even then, they may not trust the hound archon and expect a hidden agenda - but that could then be for them to investigate.
Either way, having them rub elbows with a powerful lich when you're already assuming they'll do something self-destructive and torpedo the whole adventure sounds like a colossally bad plan. "Let's get involved in a land war in Asia" levels of bad.
| 1 person marked this as a favorite. |
And I don't believe for a second that a lawful good outsider would be cool trusting a lich.Oh, I think it's possible that a hound archon could trust a lich. It all depends on the lich. But a lich who is a former general for the Whispering Tyrant?!? I'm not sure I'd trust the hound archon's judgment and assume he was under some form of dominion.
I think the OP is much better off just having the job given to them by the archon in the first place. He can say he's working for a powerful patron and not identify who he is. Even then, they may not trust the hound archon and expect a hidden agenda - but that could then be for them to investigate.
Either way, having them rub elbows with a powerful lich when you're already assuming they'll do something self-destructive and torpedo the whole adventure sounds like a colossally bad plan. "Let's get involved in a land war in Asia" levels of bad.
Inconceivable!
I'll freely acknowledge that fighting someone you can't hope to beat isn't always the right thing to do, however, sometimes it is. Sometimes a person of faith would believe that their resistance is more important than their life.except it isn't as it's tantamount to surrendering. fighting an unwinnable battle isn't resistance it's giving in to the inevitability.
Well, there's always the Irish Republican Brotherhood's Easter Rebellion in 1916. They lost the battle, never really had much of a chance at it (their president fully expected to be martyred), failed in their objective of getting into the treaty negotiations as a Great War belligerent... but ultimately won through Sinn Fein's massive electoral turn-around over the Home Rule Party.
So I wouldn't rule out martyrdom as a successful strategy.
I'll freely acknowledge that fighting someone you can't hope to beat isn't always the right thing to do, however, sometimes it is. Sometimes a person of faith would believe that their resistance is more important than their life.except it isn't as it's tantamount to surrendering. fighting an unwinnable battle isn't resistance it's giving in to the inevitability.
Well, there's always the Irish Republican Brotherhood's Easter Rebellion in 1916. They lost the battle, never really had much of a chance at it (their president fully expected to be martyred), failed in their objective of getting into the treaty negotiations as a Great War belligerent... but ultimately won through Sinn Fein's massive electoral turn-around over the Home Rule Party.
So I wouldn't rule out martyrdom as a successful strategy.
we're not talking about revolutions or trying to sway ideals. we're talking about a paladin having a dinner party with an extremely powerful lich.
we're not talking about revolutions or trying to sway ideals. we're talking about a paladin having a dinner party with an extremely powerful lich.
Just wait for the legend of that single bold act to grow in the retelling...
Just wait for the legend of that single bold act to grow in the retelling...
we're not talking about revolutions or trying to sway ideals. we're talking about a paladin having a dinner party with an extremely powerful lich.
liches are already hated though...