Problem player, need advice (CoS Spoilers)

[jaappleton]

This might be a bit lengthy, so please bare with me.

So we've been going through Curse of Strahd. We're level 6.

1. About 5 sessions ago, the Berserker (We have two Barbs, one Berserker and my Totem) got dominated. Sorcerer tried to kill him, and nearly succeeded. Even after he was below ZERO HP, the Sorc continued to do stuff like Inflict Wounds. I, myself, was not there for this session. If I had been, I would've stopped things out of game and brought stuff to a halt, and talked about what was happening. Paladin, in-game, intervened and was able to keep the Berserker alive.

2. Two sessions ago, after we got Strahd's Tome, he was waiting for us outside the Inn we rested at when we awoke. We heard his voice, demanding we come out and give it to him. Wolves began jumping through the windows, attacking all sorts of innocent people. So, we left the inn and went outside to meet him. Paladin held the book. My Totem Barb spoke with Strahd, as the Paladin only wanted to strike him down (Admire the dedication, Pally, but we didn't have a leg to stand on).

So, in exchange for the Tome, my Barb tried to negotiate a deal. Strahd gives us immunity to him, his minions, etc for 48 hours, and we'll forfeit the Tome. Strahd accepts. During out private conversation, I asked Strahd what powers made him this way, and he told me the location of the Amber Temple, and to see for myself.

Paladin attempts to rip the Tome. Sorcerer fires off a spell at Paladin. I shouted at the Sorc... And to be honest, I'm not certain if I did that as a player or in character. But I told him to knock that crap off.

Strahd takes his Tome, states that the clock is now ticking on our deal. I get the bright idea to go raid the treasury of Castle Ravenloft. So, we rush there and enter. We don't specifically know where it is, and end up in a tower with... the Heart. Its at this point that the Sorc stays down at the base of the tower, saying he wants to check for anyone coming as the rest of us go investigate the bright red light at the top of the tower. After a few moments of us going up the stairs of the tower, the Paladin notices there are about a dozen vampires at the bottom of the tower chasing us, with no sign of the Sorc.... with Strahd standing at the base of the tower, looking up at us.

Fight, and we're losing, badly. Strahd himself hasn't moved.

Before the end of the session (Still in combat), DM slides the scene to the Sorcerer, fleeing the Castle.

-----

So... To recap:

1. Tried to legitimately kill the Berserker
2. Attacked the Paladin
3. Left us all to die

Its at this point, honestly, I don't want to play with him. Not to sound like I want to take my ball and go home, but if one of my characters can't trust someone they're hunting monsters with, if they feel they always have to look over their shoulder, WHY would they go with his Sorc?

You can say my character wouldn't know that he abandoned everyone, and tried killing another party member, etc. But our 'base of operations' have primarily been Vallaki, and you could argue that word would get out that 6 adventurers left and only 1 came back. Could get a bit of a reputation there. And several other party members have died throughout the course of the adventure, but not his fault. Still, there's an argument to be made his Sorc is 'cursed' and those who travel with him will die. Maybe I'm stretching there, but as superstitious as the citizens of Barovia are, I can see the argument for it.

Now, my Totem is sitting on 7HP. We're not going to win, there's no way. There are a few ideas I have, and I admit, I'm not very proud of any of them.

I don't want the rest of the party to suffer a TPK here in the tower. And, perhaps quite selfishly of me, I also want to have some severe consequences for the Sorc. I know two wrongs don't make a right, but at the same time, I don't have any other ideas (Which is why I'm here).

My proposal: My Barb calls out to Strahd, offering another deal. Spare the lives of my companions in the tower, let them go... and I'll take him to Ireena. I'd also going to try to convince him first, I need more power if I'm going to be able to get her away from where she is... and as a result, Strahd needs to bring me to the Amber Temple. Maybe, once I have one of the Dark Gifts, I can fight Strahd off long enough to maybe save Ireena? Or... Give up Ireena, then kill the Sorc, saying its a consequence of his actions. IMO, it really is their fault this course of events has taken place, but that's also fairly petty.

At the same time... He's been a dink for awhile, if you ask me, and the Sorc should absolutely die.

[Mercurias]

First thing’s first, I’d probably talk to the DM and the Sorc both. I wouldn’t want to plan a course of action that cheeses off the table in response to...A course of action that cheesed off the table.

The Sorc might fully know and expect that he’s going to have people after him, or he might be oblivious to how annoyed he’s making everyone else. I’m not sure about the context, but getting on the same page and making sure the DM knows what’s up so he (or she) doesn’t feel the need to intervene will probably help.

If the DM is fine with it, and the Sorc’s player understands everything, then I’d say you straight-up offer your service to Strahd directly in exchange for power and one week to “get affairs in order”. If you promise not to act against Strahd or his agents in that time, he might even go along with it.

Then you just kill the Sorc and say enough bad words for the Paladin to smite you into oblivion, vengeance fulfilled.

[Corran]

At the same time... He's been a dink for awhile, if you ask me, and the Sorc should absolutely die.

I sympathize, cause especially the occasion of trying to kill the unconscious berserker was sh***y. But if you want to hope for a fast and clean solution, then just solve the issue out of character and only out of character. You can't try doing away with PvP issues if you don't abandon (perhaps justifiable from a character's perspective) thoughts of fueling them yourself. It will be unlikely and very difficult to have that player play nice while also you are trying to get in-game catharsis. Commit to either solving this issue out of character, or in character, but not both.

[Temperjoke]

Truthfully, I don't think there's a clean IC answer to this, simply because the characters involved likely aren't going to survive. I think you're going to need to have a discussion OOC on the situation. It's necessary too, you aren't having fun, and it sounds like it's going to be a continuing obstacle to you having fun. Maybe there really is a good explanation for it, but IC reasons keeps the sorcerer and DM from sharing them with you? I mean, it sounds like the sorcerer might have been turned or made a separate deal with Strahd, or even replaced somehow.

Either way, this is just going to continue to be a problem unless you guys have a talk OOC about it.

[Nagog]

Step 1: Survive. If that means a deal with Strahd, speaking with the DM and returning as a Revenant, or other out of the box options. Just make sure your character, and preferably the Paladin (who was there for when the Sorc attempted to murder the Berserker), get out.
Step 2: Locate the Sorc. If you never see him again and the Player rolls up a new character, all the better for it. Hopefully that character will be less Murder Hobo and better for the team than their Sorc is. If you do manage to find them, confront them about it. Ask them where they were, why they didn't warn the party of the horde of vampires. Feel free to start raging, being left for dead like that is a perfect IC reason to be pissed off, and as a barbarian, being angry is second nature.
Step 3: Unless the Sorc gives good reason for you not to (in or out of character, hopefully both), murder them. If the Paladin can be persuaded to do so (He did after all witness and actively prevent this person from murdering his friend), have him help. the Paladin's Aura should help against any spells they may try to use to deter/hinder you, and with your Rage and damage, it should be a quick fight.

As for solving this issue OOC, definitely try that as well, however from experience, the majority of people who play this way chalk up such issues to "That's just who they are as a character". I may be a bit jaded on that due to experience, and there are definitely exceptions to this, but as I said, personal experience.

[jaappleton]

For the record.... I have EVERY right to be a bit upset by this, right?

I’m not out of bounds there?

[Nagog]

For the record.... I have EVERY right to be a bit upset by this, right?

I’m not out of bounds there?

You have every right to be ticked. There are good and fun ways to have a shady character and even fun ways to have them betray the party. This is neither of those, this is one character being an active detrament to the party for reasons they have not shared in or out of character. They have actively sought the death of a fellow party member for something that was out of that player's control, and may have caused a TPK on top of that. I'm ticked about it, and I don't even have a character invested in the situation.

[OverLordOcelot]

You have every right to be ticked. There are good and fun ways to have a shady character and even fun ways to have them betray the party.

I'll disagree a little - there aren't good and fun ways to have a shady character that betrays the party when the character gets to hide behind the 'I'm a PC shield', and that's what seems to be happening here. If he's allowed to screw over the party but you aren't allowed to kill him or make a deal that screws him, your DM/player group are putting you into an unfair situation that is unwinnable and forcing your character to play contrary to his nature. People who do the 'nyaa, nyaa, I'm going to rob/betray/steal from you because I know the DM will let me get away with it but won't let you respond in kind' are doing some pretty obnoxious metagaming.

[Nagog]

I'll disagree a little - there aren't good and fun ways to have a shady character that betrays the party when the character gets to hide behind the 'I'm a PC shield', and that's what seems to be happening here. If he's allowed to screw over the party but you aren't allowed to kill him or make a deal that screws him, your DM/player group are putting you into an unfair situation that is unwinnable and forcing your character to play contrary to his nature. People who do the 'nyaa, nyaa, I'm going to rob/betray/steal from you because I know the DM will let me get away with it but won't let you respond in kind' are doing some pretty obnoxious metagaming.

Well that's the example of a shady character that isn't fun. I've played a few campaigns with players that betrayed the party, and while a lot of us out of game saw it coming, it made sense narritively and we had every option to kill off their character for their decisions, and in a few cases, kill them we did. The player knew that was a possibility, and they rolled up a new character, no whining or bemoaning it. If the player of said traitor throws a fit when you act in character to retaliate against these actions, then they shouldn't be playing a cooperative game like D&D.

[Talij]

One question. Did the sorcerer die and come back to life at early levels? In that campaign there is a magic that brings PC's back if they die before level 5 I believe. Won't go into detail, but there are possible... Side effects that could somewhat explain the sorcerer's behavior.

If not, sounds like he's being a ****

[jaappleton]

One question. Did the sorcerer die and come back to life at early levels? In that campaign there is a magic that brings PC's back if they die before level 5 I believe. Won't go into detail, but there are possible... Side effects that could somewhat explain the sorcerer's behavior.

If not, sounds like he's being a ****

Nope. I know what you’re talking about, as I am DMing CoS for another group.

Nothin’ like that going on.

[djreynolds]

Mindless rage is a 6th level ability, while raging or by entering a rage they are immune to charm and fear.

Dominate person charms them.

So the berserker should be free to go, if he was raging when this happened. However, if you are charmed before hand it only suspends this dominate person, charmed condition.

And every time he gets damaged, AFB, he gets a save

[Trickery]

I'm of the opinion that betrayal should not be tolerated. As a group of adventurers, your team would have every reason needed to be absolutely sure they could trust each other. And there are more than enough in-game ways for that trust to be guaranteed that it can be hand-waved. Detect Thoughts is just one basic way you can check to see whether a person is lying. I don't really want to play in a game where me and the players I trust have to use that against the other players, wait for them to fail their saving throw, ask if they would ever betray the party, and kill their character if the answer is yes.

Unfortunately, many people feel differently. They think PCs betraying each other is, somehow, a fun and thematic part of the game. They seem to think they're writing a novel and not engaging in a multi-player game.

I feel strongly enough about this that, in the last campaign I ran, I created a permanent mental link between the players as part of the campaign story. One of the players didn't like it. He was exactly the one who had engaged in pvp and deception in the last campaign. He didn't want other PCs to know what his was doing and thinking. He left after two sessions, and I said good riddance.

In short, if you're playing this kind of game, everyone needs to know and agree to it ahead of time. Otherwise, it isn't the PC betraying the party; it's the player. After all, he picked the character.

Talk to the DM and the player about it. Tell them you're not okay with players betraying each other.

Best case scenario, the betrayal gets retconned and the player stops doing that.

Worst case scanrio, you have both reason and excuse to bring a character perfectly designed to assassinate the Sorcerer at an optimal moment. He can't complain, as it's what his character already did. If he or the DM make a big deal about it, you can always point to the earlier example and say that this is the kind of campaign they signed up for.

[djreynolds]

The unfortunate aspect of CoS..... there is much more temptation down the road game wise.

I might revisit to see if the 6th berserker barbarian was raging while this domination took place, and if he was then the sorcerer had no reason to have killed him.

And perhaps spin it, that this was all a "bad dream" from Strahd. And everyone can get back to playing.

[DracoKnight]

Mindless rage is a 6th level ability, while raging or by entering a rage they are immune to charm and fear.

Dominate person charms them.

So the berserker should be free to go, if he was raging when this happened. However, if you are charmed before hand it only suspends this dominate person, charmed condition.

And every time he gets damaged, AFB, he gets a save

I know this because I chat all the time with jaapleton, but they were 5th level when the Dominate happened.

[jaappleton]

I know this because I chat all the time with jaapleton, but they were 5th level when the Dominate happened.

Everything about this is accurate. We chat on Twitter constantly about character builds.

I also briefly spoke with the DM.

I asked if the Sorc were working with Strahd, because that’d at least explain the sabotage. He replied ‘No, not working with Strahd.’

I then tried to be incredibly respectful instead of losing my damn mind

Paraphrasing, I essentially said that I’m struggling to understand what was going on. Because the Sorc’s actions have essentially led to a TPK, and I just.... I don’t understand why.

Then I stated that I’d come up with a plan to save the party (in my original post, my thought of working for Strahd to get Ireena in exchange for everyone else’s lives), but it’d require some DM cooperation.

Silence.

Now, my DM is actually a bit notorious for not getting back to people, so him not responding is par for the course. So I haven’t stated my proposal just yet.

That said....

At this point, I think I have expressed my frustration. I have said that to the DM. If, in our session Friday, this isn’t resolved, then during that session I am going to enact my plan.

The frustrating thing will be if the party and / or my Barb dies, our new characters will have virtually no reason at all to distrust the Sorc. Unless I can do something like say, “Everyone you leave town with dies”, but that’s a pretty big stretch.

[Pelle]

You should let the sorceror player know you are unhappy with his behaviour, that's the root of your issue.

[Laserlight]

It's perfectly reasonable to say "our new characters don't know you or have any reason to trust you enough to go adventuring with you", particularly in CoS.

[jdizzlean]

your next adventure could be your new characters hunting the sorc. make the sorc the new big bad and go after him. all your new toons could simply be relatives of the ones that died.

thats even easier if you can figure a way to send a message out before you all die, even something like a raven with a note tied to it's leg, you are in ravenloft after all right? it doesn't have to be a celestial raven, perhaps there's a LoTR raven about, or some wizard/sorcs familiar watching the events unfold. shouldn't be that hard

[Randomthom]

For me, step one would be to ask the DM if the sorcerer has in-game reasons for acting the way he is (a yes/no answer will do, you're not asking to know the reasons, just asking if they exist). If the answer is yes then it's a good time to check with the DM if he is happy for you to react in-game too. Playing a pissed off barbarian, he ought to know what you mean but perhaps spell it out just in case.

If the DM says that he's not sure why the sorcerer did those things then it's probably time for an OoC chat about this...

[Maelynn]

I also briefly spoke with the DM.

I asked if the Sorc were working with Strahd, because that’d at least explain the sabotage. He replied ‘No, not working with Strahd.’

I then tried to be incredibly respectful instead of losing my damn mind

Paraphrasing, I essentially said that I’m struggling to understand what was going on. Because the Sorc’s actions have essentially led to a TPK, and I just.... I don’t understand why.

Then I stated that I’d come up with a plan to save the party (in my original post, my thought of working for Strahd to get Ireena in exchange for everyone else’s lives), but it’d require some DM cooperation.

Silence.

Now, my DM is actually a bit notorious for not getting back to people, so him not responding is par for the course. So I haven’t stated my proposal just yet.

That said....

At this point, I think I have expressed my frustration. I have said that to the DM. If, in our session Friday, this isn’t resolved, then during that session I am going to enact my plan.

The frustrating thing will be if the party and / or my Barb dies, our new characters will have virtually no reason at all to distrust the Sorc. Unless I can do something like say, “Everyone you leave town with dies”, but that’s a pretty big stretch.

Well, "not working with Strahd" doesn't mean that something else is going on. There might be some secret thing planned by the DM and the Sorcerer, which could explain why the DM isn't so eager to intervene and the Sorcerer is doing a lot of 'bad guy' things. If it were a movie, and one of the party were to stay behind and then suddenly there's an attack, then you'd immediately know they're a betrayer. In a D&D game it just feels different, because you expect every player to work together.

There's been a lot of debate on the whole 'should a PC betray a party and if so, should this be a secret IC as well as OOC?'. If you have different opinions on this matter within the same party, then it could lead to nasty situations. It seems you're heading to one such situation.

You can do 2 things: either talk about your concern with the DM, or find an in-game way to deal with it. You tried the first, it didn't seem to have worked. So now you're trying the second. Go for it.

And let us know how it went.

[jaappleton]

Session is tonight.

Just spoke with the DM.

He’s heard what my Barb is willing to do. To give up Ireena in an attempt to save the rest of the party, if it meant getting to murderstomp the Sorc. He understands it. If it plays out, he’s fine with it.

He is going to talk about party divergence prior to the session. He’s aware the situation is.... Fragile, would be a good description.

So we’ll see how it goes. I’ll have an update tomorrow.

[Torpin]

I've dealt with ****ty players betraying the party and great players betraying the party, i even had one game where everyone betrayed the party (we were all apart of a resistance cell but each one of us was sent from a different faction, i was a member of the royal guard, some one was an officer in the military...) and there is a huge difference between someone just being a **** about everything and someone having a compelling narrative reason for betraying the party. a good betrayal comes with a great gaming moment, usually a lot of impact that you will remember fondly as being apart of an amazing story. this sounds like you will end up with just a bad taste in your mouth and come fall something at work will remind you of what happened and you will be annoyed the rest of the day.

[jaappleton]

I've dealt with ****ty players betraying the party and great players betraying the party, i even had one game where everyone betrayed the party (we were all apart of a resistance cell but each one of us was sent from a different faction, i was a member of the royal guard, some one was an officer in the military...) and there is a huge difference between someone just being a **** about everything and someone having a compelling narrative reason for betraying the party. a good betrayal comes with a great gaming moment, usually a lot of impact that you will remember fondly as being apart of an amazing story. this sounds like you will end up with just a bad taste in your mouth and come fall something at work will remind you of what happened and you will be annoyed the rest of the day.

I agree wholeheartedly that betrayal can be handled incredibly well.

Don’t think this one, assuming it’s a betrayal, has been handled well.

[jaappleton]

So the DM wasn’t lying when I asked if Sorc was working with Strahd.

In game, we’re in the tower, and after a few more rounds, the Berserker gets knocked down the tower, falling, taking enough to get KO’d. Fails his first save, rolls a 1 in his 2nd. Dead. (Note: He’s a little new to 5E, and is eager to try all sorts of classes and such, so he’s not broken up about this. Kind of excited by it.)

Paladin managed to smash the Heart into a hundred pieces. Strahd and the vampire spawn take off.... (Think the DM took pity on our situation, honestly. Not looking a gift horse in the mouth. Yeah, it’s CoS, it’s a deadly module, but given the scenario... I think DM showed leniency.)

So the Druid, my Barb, and the Paladin escape the castle. We’ve had enough, we learned our lesson. At the very least, we have a dragon skull now >_>

We get to the gates of Castle Ravenloft, and there’s a note pinned to it, from the Sorc. Says he went to the village of Barovia, where we stumbled into after escaping Death House.

I need to take a moment to clarify: Throughout the week I had been talking to the DM and the Paladin player. No communication with the Druid or Berserker, I simply don’t have their contact info (played over Roll20).

Druid: Yeah F that, I’m going to kill that jerk.
Folks, I grinned ear to ear.
Sorc player, who is there for this session, looks taken aback.

Druid: We all agreed to a plan, this guy totally abandoned us to die! Grom (my Barb), what do you think?

Grom: I’d like to murderstomp him, yeah.

Druid: Absolutely! Let’s heal up, rest, and make a plan.

So while the party rests, we all take a moment, OOC, to talk about WTF happened:

Sorc: It was too rough of an area we were all going to die!

Everyone: You got one of us killed! You abandoned the whole plan! None of our characters have any reason to trust yours. We wouldn’t travel together at this point.

Sorc: Uh...

Me: You’re kinda screwed that we (mostly) lived. Your Sorc is on borrowed time. Sorry, but there’s no way my Barb would let this go. We’ve established how he is.

Paladin: My Paladin is legit contemplating a swap to Vengeance over this.

DM: Can confirm.

Sorc: ....Alright, DM, I can’t keep it going at this point: When we were in a Vistani camp in session four or five, I drank a potion that gave me lycanthropy. Sorc has been Chaotic Evil since, he did leave you all for dead.

DM: That is true.

——
At this point, I want to state that a party betrayal can be a big reveal. Can be a monumental moment. But if we had died, we never would have known. So... I still think it was a bad way to do a reveal like this. But alright, I’ll acknowledge some behavior now makes sense.
——

So we chat for a bit. Sorc player is bringing a new character, a Forge Cleric. Berserker bringing a Rogue.

So... I don’t like HOW it was handled. I certainly see WHY it was handled in such a way. I, personally, would have done it differently... but I understand why.

Now there’s a Sorc Werewolf we gotta kill. But Ireena is safe. Since the Sorc knows about her, my Barb and the Druid are actually staying in Vallaki, where we stashed her, to guard her.

So quite a few people are bringing new PCs next game.

[Keravath]

Thanks for the update. It is nice to know what was going on in the situation. At least the motivations behind the situations tend to make a bit more sense now.

However, I'd also suggest that some of the role play aspects may be due to how the player/DM involved chose to interpret chaotic evil and lycanthropy in particular.

First, one of the primary goals in CoS for the players is to actually escape the demi-plane and return to the real world assuming you came from outside in the first place. As long as the sorc wasn't too unintelligent, they may decide that the best way to get out might be to work with the party temporarily. There is also a lot of text under lycanthropy in the monster manual that would have made the situation much more palatable.

Alignment PHB:
"Individuals might vary significantly from that typical behavior, and few people are perfectly and consistently faithful to the precepts of their alignment."
"Chaotic evil (CE) creatures act with arbitrary violence, spurred by their greed, hatred, or bloodlust. Demons, red dragons, and ores are chaotic evil."


From MM:
"Evil lycanthropes hide among normal folk, emerging in animal form at night to spread terror and bloodshed, especially under a full moon."

"A lycanthrope can either resist its curse or embrace it. By resisting the curse, a lycanthrope retains its normal alignment and personality while in humanoid form. It lives its life as it always has, burying deep the bestial urges raging inside it. However, when the full moon rises, the curse becomes too strong to resist, transforming the individual into its beast form-or into a horrible hybrid form that combines animal and humanoid traits. When the moon wanes, the beast within can be controlled once again. Especially if the cursed creature is unaware of its condition, it might not remember the events of its transformation, though those memories often haunt a lycanthrope as bloody dreams. Some individuals see little point in fighting the curse and accept what they are. With time and experience, they learn to master their shapechanging ability and can assume beast form or hybrid form at will. Most lycanthropes that embrace their bestial natures succumb to bloodlust, becoming evil, opportunistic creatures that prey on the weak."


The description from the MM is particularly useful. Evil lycanthropes are able to hide among the normal folk. They can't do this if they betray everyone. They have a secret to keep, they know their lives depend on keeping that secret, acting out against those closest to them, who provide the cloak of normality they use to hide is probably out of character.

However, even before that, at the beginning, the character may not even know they are a lycanthrope, they may not remember what happens when they transform. In addition, the character can resist the curse so that their alignment is not changed in humanoid form, or they could choose to embrace the curse.

My impression is that both the DM and the player read the CHAOTIC EVIL, went with popular tropes for lycanthropes and decided that in humanoid form the sorc would betray his friends to his own detriment (which I think is actually less likely since whether the character choose to resist or embrace the curse, they still need the rest of the party to escape, unless they know of a better way out already).

In the end, the story makes it clearer why the sorcerer made certain decisions but given the nature of lycanthropy and the description in the monster manual, there was certainly a lot of leeway for it to go in different directions. After being infected, it is likely that the sorcerer will eventually have to leave the party/be killed or otherwise dealt with since even if they aren't killing party members there are innocents who will die. The paladin will also probably want to kill the creature on principle if they are ever discovered. However, there may have been options to cure the curse or restrain the character depending on how things went. (Note: some fights might also be a bit revealing since the sorc can now only be damaged by magical or silvered weapons).

[jaappleton]

snip

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. The lycanthropy I don't think was handled very well in this instance, to be brutally honest. But at the very least, context has been given.

And now every player at the table has a greater understanding. Like, prior to this, I could certainly argue the player could've been the problem.

As far as the silvered weapons thing: Awhile back, we caused a bloody revolution in Vallaki and ousted the Burgomaster AND Lady Wachter in one night. We then took all the silver in their homes (silverware, candlesticks, etc) and brought it to the blacksmith. He's nearly done making silvered versions of our weapons.... though now that the party is mostly different, I hope we aren't pigeonhole'd into those weapon choices (Feats and all, you understand).

[Temperjoke]

Yeah, I'm inclined to agree. The lycanthropy I don't think was handled very well in this instance, to be brutally honest. But at the very least, context has been given.

And now every player at the table has a greater understanding. Like, prior to this, I could certainly argue the player could've been the problem.

As far as the silvered weapons thing: Awhile back, we caused a bloody revolution in Vallaki and ousted the Burgomaster AND Lady Wachter in one night. We then took all the silver in their homes (silverware, candlesticks, etc) and brought it to the blacksmith. He's nearly done making silvered versions of our weapons.... though now that the party is mostly different, I hope we aren't pigeonhole'd into those weapon choices (Feats and all, you understand).

Well, I'm glad this was resolved without OOC harm to the sorcerer's player. And coming out of the whole incident with a better understanding is a good ending at least. And ending up with a new NPC arch-nemesis besides Strahd works out well, now you don't have to play mental gymnastics to work with the sorcerer again.

As for the silvered weapons, the ones staying behind to guard Ireena will probably need them too. I'd imagine that the Sorcerer will be put under Strahd's control like the other werewolves, maybe even leading them to attack.

[jaappleton]

Well, I'm glad this was resolved without OOC harm to the sorcerer's player. And coming out of the whole incident with a better understanding is a good ending at least. And ending up with a new NPC arch-nemesis besides Strahd works out well, now you don't have to play mental gymnastics to work with the sorcerer again.

As for the silvered weapons, the ones staying behind to guard Ireena will probably need them too. I'd imagine that the Sorcerer will be put under Strahd's control like the other werewolves, maybe even leading them to attack.

Awhile back, in Vallaki, we led a revolution against both the idiot Burgomaster and Lady Wachter. Their homes were raided and we brought all their silver (silverware, candlesticks, etc) and brought it all to the blacksmith. He's nearly ready with our silver weapons.

.....sucks half the party is different, but my Barbarian should have a silvered glaive to help protect Ireena.

[Maelynn]

I think that turned out great, actually - the Sorc is now an evil NPC, Ireena didn't need to be sacrificed, and the players all bring characters that can be reasonably expected to join forces.

The Paladin saying he'd go Vengeance over this made me laugh.

It's a good thing that you guys had the ooc chat and explained that the PCs had every reason to distrust the Sorc up to the point of wanting to hunt him down and kill him.

Sounds like the biggest issue was that the betrayal part wasn't handled ideally, but it could've been handled worse. As you say, some things make sense in hindsight. Probably a good lesson for both the DM and the Sorc to handle betrayal a little differently, should there be a next time.