Characters loosing levels and abilities

[T'Holoth Shadowborn]

http://www.ysgardhala.org/viewtopic.php?t=2087

I know A few players have lost levels and abilities due to their actions in game.
Eclipse loosing his Paladin levels is one example. Another would be the drow loosing levels (?) due to withdrawing from lloth's favor. (Which was player agreed IIRC)

I'm actually very glad this can happen. I hated on avlis seeing paladins act like CN fighters and recieve no reprecussions. Or clerics who didnt know the first thing about their gods.

I'm wondering if this is always a player-mutual decision or if DMs can simply choose to remove levels or exchange them as a role playing device.

In Kay'Lana's case I would assume killing and desicrating an animal would be a big no no as an epic druid.
The same if a Paladin were to murder a child or broke their word and did something seriously against their class's concept.

When a character does something against their alignment or class in a major way what are the options the DMs have when it comes to a character keeping their class and/or levels?

Obviously I'm asking because I'm curious to see what rammifications happen to Kay'Lana but I'm also curious because Tholoth is in hades and exploring different options for his future- im wondering what may happen and how extreme some chances might be.

[Arkon]

Actually, since this does involve my character, I won't be making the call on this. I'll leave that for others to decide. However, in light of that it did give me the idea to look up what Wizards definition of a summoned creature and what happens to it is, which was as I suspected when performing the action in the first place.

As per the PHB

Code: Select all

summoning subschool

A summoning spell instantly brings a creature or object to a place you designate. When the spell ends or is dispelled, a summoned creature is instantly sent back to where it came from, but a summoned object is not sent back unless the spell description specifically indicates this. A summoned creature also goes away if it is killed or if its hit points drop to 0 or lower. It is not really dead. It takes 24 hours for the creature to reform, during which time it can't be summoned again.

When the spell that summoned a creature ends and the creature disappears, all the spells it has cast expire. A summoned creature cannot use any innate summoning abilities it may have, and it refuses to cast any spells that would cost it XP, or to use any spell-like abilities that would cost XP if they were spells.
Source: PHB

Hense, actually the post itself I made was wrong, there would have been no body for you to find. There is also the fact that Kay'lana herself didn't kill the summoned Dire Tiger either.


Now as to your question about what DMs can do to someone, basically, a DM can do anything they want to to a charater providing that if it is something that will greatly affect the character, they get the player to agree first. If a player refuses, then the action must not be done, though this can be cause for the DM to disclude you in future events as they see fit (this is every DMs innate right, remember, they do this for fun, not because they have to)

In the case of extreme things, such as a person going completely against their alignment or class, a DM can do whatever they deem worthy as a punishment for that person, loss of levels, loss of holy items for clerical types, loss of spells, whatever. It's up to the DM. If they feel it necessary, such as in the case with the paladin, it is usually brought up to the team and the team makes the decision on what to do about it.

[apandapion]

In Kay'Lana's case I would assume killing and desicrating an animal would be a big no no as an epic druid.

I don't see why people have so much trouble with this.

A mage channels the powers of magic for his own use.

A druid channels the powers of nature for his own use.

Unless you are on Avlis at the moment, a druid losing levels for killing an animal is just as stupid as a wizard losing levels for snapping a wand. Druids are not a subclass of priest, the actions of druids are not audited by any sentient force, and as long as the natural cycle remains intact druids have a pretty free rein to act.

You'd hate the epic level druids in my tabletop game. One penned an epic spell to cause every plant for 50 miles to explode to destroy a spreading undead menace. Did he kill animals? Yes, and plants, and a couple of small cities. But the job got very done.

[T'Holoth Shadowborn]

Well I hope you don't mind me trying to put Kay'lana in hot water cause honestly it's kinda fun

All kidding aside though I think in Kay'Lana's case she's in a good position for some serious DM intervention. Not good or bad persay but just something with a big impact.

As for Tholoth i'll PM the team about some ideas I had and see what they think and what appropiate punishments/restrictions would be for what I had in mind.

You'd hate the epic level druids in my tabletop game. One penned an epic spell to cause every plant for 50 miles to explode to destroy a spreading undead menace. Did he kill animals? Yes, and plants, and a couple of small cities. But the job got very done.

this is all subjective. Druids are about nature and the balance of nature. To decide on something like this the team would need to discuss and come to an agreement on druids.

Would a druid kill 100 animals to save 1000? (ex. england allowing the firebombing of a city during ww2. if they would have evacuated the city the germans would have known that their secret code was broken)
Would a druid destroy a forest to stop the spread of a plague?
It's easy for us to use our logic and decide this kind of stuff but this is a fantasy setting.
A paladin would never knowingly commit an evil act even if it ment saving a whole world. good isn't something to be bartered with. Sometimes getting the job done is just as evil.

I honestly don't know how it works with Druids. I see druids as a serious Rp class thats often over looked. Like druids using animals like meat shields, to me that just doesn't jive.
For something like this everyone has an opinion- the team would need to decide whats what.
A druid desicrating nature seems as unnatural to me as a good cleric desicrating a grave yard or a wizard passing up a chance to explore an ancient library.

I disagree that a druid channels nature for his own use. Druids are about protecting and keeping the balance of nature, not worrying about themselves IMHO.

[charlierazor]

I just miss the day's of yore, when you sat around a table rollin dice, and if your character did something bad, or if the dice rolled bad, tough luck, the DM served out punishment whether you liked it or not. Lost an awsome paladin I played once to such a situation. *shrugs*

To me, it kind of takes the edge of realism away, when a character is constantly allowed to go against the basic fundamentals of their class. Yes, it's fantasy. Yes, it's about having fun. But the biggest idea behind it...is to kinda get lost in it, almost feeling as if your really there.

Ofcourse, each situation is special. Look at the Druids of that one Goddess in Avlis, that are all about the destructive power of nature. They worship only one facet of Nature, and really could care less what gets destroyed in their path. But, then it is true...LG is LG, so it's hard for me to see a LG type class getting away with the flex that other classes have. Ofcourse, that is why I consider LG one of the hardest classes to RP...and the most challenging. If done right though, it can be the most rewarding.

My two jink,

Charlie

[Arkon]

Actually, i agree with punishing players for going against their ethos, alignment, and class. As said before, I leave this up to the other DMs on the team, and the players to decide since it does involve my character. And I will accept whatever punishment comes around. I'm all about RP, so if it can make for a good bit of RP, I'm all for it.

[T'Holoth Shadowborn]

Maybe punishment is the wrong word. You get punished when you do something wrong.

Going against a characters alignment, ethos or class restrictions isn't bad, it's just takign their role playing in a different direction and comes with consiquences.

yes I'm saying this to try and cover my ass

[apandapion]

this is all subjective. Druids are about nature and the balance of nature. To decide on something like this the team would need to discuss and come to an agreement on druids.

Deciding that all druids should act like a specific conception of the druid is like deciding all wizards should act like Harry Potter.

Would a druid kill 100 animals to save 1000? (ex. england allowing the firebombing of a city during ww2. if they would have evacuated the city the germans would have known that their secret code was broken)

A druid would kill 100 animals if it accomplished his goals, unless doing so directly weakens nature. One hunter kills well over 100 animals to feed himself - if a druid can accomplish something he desires by doing so, then he would. Of course, if the animals in question were rare or a signficant percentage (over 50%) of the population in the area, the answer changes. I would say that druids care about ecologies and not specific cute bunny rabbits.

Would a druid destroy a forest to stop the spread of a plague?

We're talking about a human plague here? Malin is telling me in the back of my head that there are too many humans already. Can he destroy a forest to spread a plague? That's a substantially more interesting question.

It's easy for us to use our logic and decide this kind of stuff but this is a fantasy setting.

In most games I've played in, characters with high knowledge:nature get away with a nearly complete modern understanding of ecology.

A paladin would never knowingly commit an evil act even if it ment saving a whole world. good isn't something to be bartered with. Sometimes getting the job done is just as evil.

I'll pass on commenting on paladins.

I honestly don't know how it works with Druids. I see druids as a serious Rp class thats often over looked. Like druids using animals like meat shields, to me that just doesn't jive.

With your conception of druids. Shall we go into how mages running around in plate breaks my conception of mages, or shall we just move on?

For something like this everyone has an opinion- the team would need to decide whats what.
A druid desicrating nature seems as unnatural to me as a good cleric desicrating a grave yard or a wizard passing up a chance to explore an ancient library.

I disagree that a druid channels nature for his own use. Druids are about protecting and keeping the balance of nature, not worrying about themselves IMHO.

For some reason, every other class gets the freedom to make thier own decisions, but druids, no, we have to be treehuggers - and thus you ask the team to come down and tell us what's what. You don't see me asking the team to tell you how to play your character, do you?

Other classes can play in new and interesting ways and they are refered to as exellent roleplayers. But if a druid cracks the styrofoam mold he came in, he's clearly 'not playing his class'.

I take back every negative thing I ever said about psions, as I now realize that druids and psions are in the same boat - we are both burdened by the expectations of others on how we should play and what we should be able to do. They are persecuted because they are new and different, and we are persecuted because someone read the Mists of Avalon one too many times.

[silverdragonams]

apandapion,

I'm not sure why you are geting all bent out of shape. Tholoth was originally commenting on a situation where it was thought that a druid brought an animal into the temple of a LG god, killed it, and used its body to desicrate a temple in an act of personal revenge (in other words, using nature to satisfy a whim).

You have to admit thats a pretty undruid-like thing to do.

For some reason, every other class gets the freedom to make thier own decisions, but druids, no, we have to be treehuggers...

Druids are defined as a class as people who revere nature. From the PH:

A druid who ceases to revere nature or changes to the prohibited alignment loses all spells and druidic abilities...

In other words, druids are supposed to be treehuggers.

Going back to the original situation, if Kay didn't actually kill the tiger, and just used its corpse, that sounds pretty normal for a CN Driud to me. Why leave the body there to rot, when it can be put to good use?

[T'Holoth Shadowborn]

Deciding that all druids should act like a specific conception of the druid is like deciding all wizards should act like Harry Potter

A druid would kill 100 animals if it accomplished his goals, unless doing so directly weakens nature. One hunter kills well over 100 animals to feed himself - if a druid can accomplish something he desires by doing so, then he would. Of course, if the animals in question were rare or a signficant percentage (over 50%) of the population in the area, the answer changes. I would say that druids care about ecologies and not specific cute bunny rabbits.

In your second statement your deciding how druids act.

I'm sure druids hate being told how to play their class as much as paladins wizards clerics and everyone else does. If your a druid you're obviously going to be defensive about it same way i'm defensive about beild told what a paladin will and will not do. Everyone has an opinion on how to play them.

Thing is, theres SO many different opinions on how to play them. In the end when an issue like this comes up the team is needed to decide what X class would do in such a such situation for this given server.
Example, On avlis druids need to have a god, on hala they dont.
Its a server by server basis.
The hala team might think that a druid killing an animal for the greater good is totally acceptable yet they may also decide a druid killing an animal for any reason is against the druidic code. In the end its a team decison. (a pill i hated to swallow but swallowed never the less)

[apandapion]

I'm not sure why you are geting all bent out of shape. Tholoth was originally commenting on a situation where it was thought that a druid brought an animal into the temple of a LG god, killed it, and used its body to desicrate a temple in an act of personal revenge (in other words, using nature to satisfy a whim).

Would it be more druidish if they ate it?

From the PH:

A druid who ceases to revere nature or changes to the prohibited alignment loses all spells and druidic abilities...

In other words, druids are supposed to be treehuggers.

That's an extremely shallow and simplistic definition of "revere nature". As a natural part of the lifecycle of a forest, it burns.

[apandapion]

Deciding that all druids should act like a specific conception of the druid is like deciding all wizards should act like Harry Potter

A druid would kill 100 animals if it accomplished his goals, unless doing so directly weakens nature. One hunter kills well over 100 animals to feed himself - if a druid can accomplish something he desires by doing so, then he would. Of course, if the animals in question were rare or a signficant percentage (over 50%) of the population in the area, the answer changes. I would say that druids care about ecologies and not specific cute bunny rabbits.

In your second statement your deciding how druids act.

If you want to quibble semantics, don't respond to me. You asked me if a druid would do something. I said they could. I didn't say they must. I don't appreciate you trying to put words in my mouth.

[slave_of_emotions]

Alright although this is actually about a ruling but druid is my favoured class i just have to post here....
I love the concept that druids gain they spells from nature and as such i dont see them using the nature for they own needs like a mage would, they use it to maintain the cycle/balance or protect nature, what ever they focus on.
And what people forget... this must be our own ignorance ... is that a human is as much part of nature like a bird, both for example use resources from nature to build housing, birds nests, humans something biger. Most people when ever they thnk of druids and nature, think about plants and animals as if humans would stand over the nature.

I myself am a fan of The Complete Book of Druids

It describes pretty well all sort of druids, from good to evil and from forest druids to desert druids. And they order more in line to 2nd edition, before FR introduced they druids worshiping gods, making them to what a cleric with domains plants and animals is. And alot worlds/DMs took over that rule, like Avlis.


Some of my best times was as i was runing for sometime a druid order like this on a server.. but left as then DMs sudently decidet to make them god worshipers. Still hoping to start something alogn this line again.


And as last.... its not on me to decide what Druids should do here and what not, i will let the DMs handle it. I am just glad aobeth does not have to worship some god.

Then i think that doing what kay did with a summon was somewhat of a ooc decission too to keep some etiquette, or would you have prefered to get pawned by a epic epic char of the first COPAP generation and she then made drawings with your body and blood in the temple ? ((damn why do i never have such luck ? ))

[Psye Shaar]

For some reason, every other class gets the freedom to make thier own decisions, but druids, no, we have to be treehuggers - and thus you ask the team to come down and tell us what's what. You don't see me asking the team to tell you how to play your character, do you?

Other classes can play in new and interesting ways and they are refered to as exellent roleplayers. But if a druid cracks the styrofoam mold he came in, he's clearly 'not playing his class'.

I take back every negative thing I ever said about psions, as I now realize that druids and psions are in the same boat - we are both burdened by the expectations of others on how we should play and what we should be able to do. They are persecuted because they are new and different, and we are persecuted because someone read the Mists of Avalon one too many times.

I would be inclined to disagree here. While psions and druids do get shit about how they're played, they're most certainly not alone.

The worst hit tends to be Paladins and probably always will be due to the rigidity of the class.

Psions/monks will always suffer where people have differing opinions on what's considered chaotic behaviour. Also when people may only see a character now and again, but will take it upon themselves to shout about how that psion/monk never meditates and is cheesing the class simply for the attacks per round or certain powers.

The rules binding clerics are dictated by the god they worship and so should be RP'd that way. If a cleric moves allignments so much that they go against the ideals of their god, then although I don't believe they should lose levels, I do believe they should at least RP the loss of powers until they find and are accepted by a new god or gain forgiveness from their own - and by this i mean a dm based acceptance in order to avoid abuse.

In the particular context of this thread, even though it was a summoned tiger, it was still sacrificed and it was still for revenge. To use my own PC as an example, ( a follower of Dra'Nar) I can say outright that he would never sacrifice even a summoned child as part of an act of revenge, even if that child wasn't actually there and couldn't actually be killed. At the end of the day, it's a druid killing an animal for no reason other than revenge. You may as well build a shrine to nature and then smash it up. The priniciple is still the same. Nothing was truly killed, but it's still for all intense and purposes, a sacrilegious act for a servant of nature.

Druid ~should~ act a certain way. Psions and monks ~should~ act a certain way. Clerics ~should~ act a certain way. It goes without saying that there has to be boundaries that must be kept within or the classes become a joke.

A druid sacrificing animals for personal gain IS wrong

A Paladin going out and murdering someone because they have a personal grievance with them IS wrong

A psion that's thick as two short planks and equally as insightful IS wrong

A cleric of Dra'Nar (excuse the example again, but it's easy) stealing from an orphanage IS wrong

While most situations are never going to be black and white, some are and it's these instances that need to be acted upon.

I would have to agree with SilverDragon that you seem to have taken this whole thing a bit personally. The original statement uses examples that can be related too because that's always the easiest way to get a message across. It wasn't meant to be a cheap shot at druids, yet that's how you seem to have perceived it. The examples used were both extreme cases, hense the reason they were used. That and the fact that T'Holoth Shadowborn just likes causing trouble

My two cents....

[slave_of_emotions]

A druid sacrificing animals for personal gain IS wrong

A Paladin going out and murdering someone because they have a personal grievance with them IS wrong

A psion that's thick as two short planks and equally as insightful IS wrong

A cleric of Dra'Nar (excuse the example again, but it's easy) stealing from an orphanage IS wrong

You forgot the factor why someone does it... since this seems to keep going about Kay, she for example seems right now mentaly completly instable.

And geh... the real problem with psions is that they were not implemented with 3ed rules, where they would be limited to psionic races and addet some other things that are as default there, like concetration checks on damage and DC Cap.. As now they are just some freaks of the nature.

[Final Shinryuu]

but I'm also curious because Tholoth is in hades and exploring different options for his future- im wondering what may happen and how extreme some chances might be.

I'll answer this part, as it relates to Hades.
It's not a cakewalk to play a paladin in the plane of true evil.
Playing there WILL get you evil points on the alignment scale. Even if it is in small increments. There isn't always a good option out of every problem, especially in Hades.

I don't judge NWN paladins by the same standards as normal DnD, and suspend spellcasting for just a single evil act, rather I give lienency and will just set their alignment a little further away from lawful good. If a paladin ever committed enough evil acts to go into evil, I'd take away the paladin levels, and replace them with Fighter or Ranger, as paladins are supposed to lose all class abilities when they lose their alignment. This would be until such time as they atone for the evil deeds, and get an Atonement spell from a priest of their god.

This is quite easy to do with LETO, a program that I'm fond of using. =)
Easy for me to keep plenty of backups of the character file, so it's not permanant at all, and can make a fun RP opportunity.
And I woulden't do anything involving LETOing a character without going through Sarmanos, as well. Things like that need team consensus.

However, I need to point out that Hades is not a server built for epic characters like the ones here on Hala. Hades isn't really even built much at all yet.
We have a small population of native characters that play occaisionally, and they are who I am catering to first and foremost.
There's currently no plans of mine to build epic areas or to run events for the epic characters here from Hala, except on a pick-up basis. (Pick-up means I log on, am bored, see someone, do something to them.)

As busy as I am with schoolwork recently, I've had hardly any time to play at all. Sarmanos is even busier than me.

So, if you're all coming to Hades, don't expect much to do, as Sarm and I are the only actual active DM's, and we're both currently unable to do much.

[dodici]

http://www.ysgardhala.org/viewtopic.php?t=2087

I know A few players have lost levels and abilities due to their actions in game.
Eclipse loosing his Paladin levels is one example. Another would be the drow loosing levels (?) due to withdrawing from lloth's favor. (Which was player agreed IIRC)

I'm actually very glad this can happen. I hated on avlis seeing paladins act like CN fighters and recieve no reprecussions. Or clerics who didnt know the first thing about their gods.

I'm wondering if this is always a player-mutual decision or if DMs can simply choose to remove levels or exchange them as a role playing device.

As Eclispe i do respect the Hala Team decision but I do not agree with it...

[slave_of_emotions]

http://www.ysgardhala.org/viewtopic.php?t=2087

I know A few players have lost levels and abilities due to their actions in game.
Eclipse loosing his Paladin levels is one example. Another would be the drow loosing levels (?) due to withdrawing from lloth's favor. (Which was player agreed IIRC)

I'm actually very glad this can happen. I hated on avlis seeing paladins act like CN fighters and recieve no reprecussions. Or clerics who didnt know the first thing about their gods.

I'm wondering if this is always a player-mutual decision or if DMs can simply choose to remove levels or exchange them as a role playing device.

As Eclispe i do respect the Hala Team decision but I do not agree with it...

Bah, once meth is back he will show you some party like they are made by sensates and you will be happy for not being a paladin and able to really enjoy them Thats if he will ever be able to get back

[Druid523]

As now they are just some freaks of the nature.

[slave_of_emotions]

As now they are just some freaks of the nature.

*spams the boards some more and tickles his chest and underarms*

What i mean is that psion class should have been left only for psionic races, in the extandet book of psions are described some very cool of them, some based on default races but more alien like , like mindflyers. With those that class could have been really a awesome addition.

[Druid523]

I'll admit it would be nice to play an Illithid...if by nice I meant hella awesome.

[Asbendale]

Well this is getting a bit heated up in here....ok heres my viwe of the druids and losing levels.

I totaly agree that if a player is changing god from one to another there have to be some changes for the charter....spicaly if you turn from an evil god.

As for druids it a very hard class to play just like paladines, you have a strickt kode to follow and are limmeted to the boundaryes of your aligment, so few can really play them the way they have to be played.

Now i think its wrong to tell people how to play there charters but some times a dm just have to say, this is all wrong. Now a druid is worshipping nauture he cares for it and he will go a very long way to protect it, but he wont go and say to a hunter that is out killing a deer "Stop that or ill kill you", even druids need food and most see the need for meat and lumber to the puplic as a thing that is needed, as long they just dont go around and chop every tree down or kills all the annimals in the forrest, then they will act to protect the nature and might even attack peopel.

A druid going to whitewood and killing all the dire tigeres there would be very evil, and ofcorse calls for a dm to tell the player this is wrong, but lets say that whitewood was taken by some great evil spiret, then the druid would feel a need to clense the forrest of evil, even if it meant that he would have to kill some of the annimals, he wouldent like it but he would do it for the greater good of nauture.

Just one more thing, ill just say that a dm schould ask a charter why they did what they did and if the have a valid rp reason to play that way, BEFORE they start taking any levels, there might be some thought behind why a player playes the way he or she does.

Asbendale

[Arkon]

DMs nearly always speak with the player prior to removing levels to make sure that A) it is ok, or B) to make sure they understand why it is happening and give the player a chance to explain their actions that led the DM to that decision.

[Final Shinryuu]

DMs nearly always speak with the player prior to removing levels to make sure that A) it is ok, or B) to make sure they understand why it is happening and give the player a chance to explain their actions that led the DM to that decision.

I'm in the practice of offering explanations even with just alignment hits, to forestall any questioning from the player.
For example, something I said to a player on Hades:
"Knowingly eating human flesh. Two points towards Evil."
This also applies with alignment changes towards good, law, or any other end. That way the player knows what they are doing, and what they'd be expected to do to shift in another direction.

[slave_of_emotions]

Why must it actualy be always good or evil, chaos or lawful... both neutral alingments are missed, i was thinking once of making a script for that, "shifting towards neutral" that checks the characters current alingmend and moves it automaticly in right direction. It would have been especialy interesting for NPC quests as curently the only way to even shift from good to neutral is doing something evil, its even like that with DM interventions :S

Neutral as its own alingment gets overseen all the time.