The problem with multi-alignment parties

[Saph]

One of the things I like about the OotS group is that the player types behind the characters are so familiar. There's the LG guy who tries to keep the group together and on-mission, the player who's so airheaded that his character can barely tie his own shoes, and the guy who everyone else hates because he kills people at random and gets the party into trouble.

Once the campaign starts to develop a bit, the players start to sort themselves out. Usually this results in the alignments of the party evening out a bit. If 5 of the PCs are playing Good-to-Neutral heroes, and the sixth is playing Stabbity McPsycho the Brainlessly Chaotic Evil, then Stabbity is probably going to end up taking a hike, voluntarily or otherwise.

I think OotS got to this point a while ago, and the last couple of strips have made it obvious. It just doesn't make any sense for supposedly Good-aligned characters to travel around with Belkar. The usual excuse - they need him - has worn thin, because they've had more than enough time by now to discover what he's like and to find someone else.

The longer Belkar sticks around, the less plausible it's going to be for the LG and CG members of the Order of the Stick to claim the 'G' part of their alignments. Sooner or later he's going to have to go.

- Saph

[Mee]

Yes, but if they get rid of him, there goes some to a lot of the humor. I'd rather have him stay, and keep the comic funny.
Who knows, maybe his Evil-hood will eventually give way to Neutral, if Good characters can turn to Neutral, Evil ones could too.
Right?

[Tarp]

you are mostly right... but what realy does not make sense is the alignment system, only 9 different ways to view the world?! It just don`t work to try to put something so complex into a box and label it.

[Jube]

And how do you reconcile the fact that he'd be doing far far more evil when not constrained by the party?

At least according to the forces of the heavens and Belkar himself (Thinking of getting down to "Some serious evil). Continuing travelling with him vs Unleashing him on the world?

Their only other option is to kill him really. Which, they couldn't/wouldn't do without him provoking it. So it'd need'a be something big. Which should be fun to see =D

[Shale]

Not only that, but the odds of him being killed off for good are pretty small, and Roy et al know it. Plus as long as the Order keeps pointing him at the villains he's actually doing some good, even if he doesn't want to admit it to himself.

[NikkTheTrick]

Haley put it nicely: Belkar is a 13+ level melee fighter. In a war, killing machines are useful. Given that fate of the world is at stake, few collateral losses due to Belkar's actions are acceptable.

Plus, what can Haley do? Give Belkar over to authorities? He made prison breaks on 2 occasions. In case of AC, he did it unarmed (with only a ring of jumping hidden in a certain place).

Kill him? Haley is good. Killing a teammember is not exactly good. And she is not a crusading paladin...

[Lupy]

Well, if the whole order got back together, Roy is the only person who could attack him, Haley and V would join right in too, cuz they hate him. Durkon would try to stop the fighting but would probably not pick a side. But Elan? He loves Haley, but even if Belkar did try to kill him, I think he would stop them. He'd make Roy and Haley stop by crying or shouting, and V on her own couldn't take him before his/her hp ran down, and so would stop...

But if the Order started fighting, well, I dont wanna think what might happen later...

Also, think about this, in my gaming group (LG former bard paladin (me), NG wizard, N fighter, LN cleric, and CN w/ evil tendencies Rougue. The Rouge and the the Cleric started yelling, the fighter (the cleric's brother in game) pulled his sword, the rouge got out his sword, and started fighting the cleric and fighter, the wizard hit him with a spell, and I decided my duty as a Paladin was to help those in need, and my team mate was gunna die, so I jumped in and pounded the wizard, the fighter attacked me, and the two of us escaped... The group broke up over it later cuz the DM kinda helped the two of us win... If Durkon has to choose, what will Thor's will be? His friends or a comrade in need?

[Kish]

Well, if the whole order got back together, Roy is the only person who could attack him, Haley and V would join right in too, cuz they hate him. Durkon would try to stop the fighting but would probably not pick a side. But Elan? He loves Haley, but even if Belkar did try to kill him, I think he would stop them.

Durkon explicitly excluded Belkar from his list of "good companions" when he was talking to Hilgya, and Elan wanted to leave him in Lord Shojo's prison. If Roy was willing to kill Belkar than Belkar would die.

[JordanGreywolf]

Yes, but if they get rid of him, there goes some to a lot of the humor. I'd rather have him stay, and keep the comic funny.
Who knows, maybe his Evil-hood will eventually give way to Neutral, if Good characters can turn to Neutral, Evil ones could too.
Right?

That's one thing that I've been concerned with - the clash between "what's funny" and "what makes sense for story." A friend of mine suggested that what they need to do is play up what often happens in groups where the PC's atrocities have gotten to be too much, but nobody is going to dismiss the PLAYER from the group. (For instance, what if Belkar is played by the bratty younger brother of one of the playing group members?)

Basically, Belkar is "banished" from the group in some way: Either the players say, "So long," and part ways once he's Kicked The Dog one too many times ... or else he meets a more permanent fate.

HOWEVER, the next day, we are introduced to Belkar's brother, Kelbar, who just happens to run into the party, and is essentially a clone of Belkar - except that maybe his Feats and Skill Points have been tweaked a bit. We know he's basically Belkar, but "in character" he's a different character, so he can't be held responsible for the actions of Belkar.

The other PCs keep messing up and calling Kelbar "Belkar." Eventually, they just give up, and somewhere along the way it's just routine to call him Belkar - but if the subject ever comes up about Belkar's past transgressions - no, that was his evil brother.

Of course, once the NEW Kelbar starts behaving just as badly as the old one ... well, then I guess we'd be introduced to Elkbar (or some other variation on the name), but after a while that joke's going to get old.

Anyway, it just seemed like a face-saving way to deal with the multi-alignment issue, in a way that parallels what happens in many groups (in my limited experience): The PCs can't tolerate the in-character transgressions of the bad-guy PC, but they can't banish the player, and he basically comes back with the same character sheet, but with a slightly different name scribbled in, to keep right on playing.

[Saph]

And how do you reconcile the fact that he'd be doing far far more evil when not constrained by the party?

I know that's the rationalisation they use, but really, it doesn't make sense. Normal people don't say: "Hey, that guy's a murderous psycho. He'd make a great travelling companion, because we could constrain him!" They travel with Belkar because he's a member of the party - the constraining thing is just the IC justification.

Their only other option is to kill him really. Which, they couldn't/wouldn't do without him provoking it.

Belkar's a far worse person than most of the hobgoblins and goblins the OotS have dealt with so far. (Actually, he's probably worse than any of the evil humanoids they've dealt with so far.) If the OotS are willing to kill several hundred Lawful Evil goblins, I'm not sure what the problem is with killing one Chaotic Evil halfling.

This is why I was saying that the only way you can justify it is in OOC terms. The obnoxious CE PC is a member of the party, so you can't do what your character would do if being roleplayed properly. Problem is, now the story's been going on long enough that we've started to think of the characters as real people, and the blind eye Haley and the others turn to Belkar's behaviour is getting jarring.

- Saph

[Sonar009]

If Roy was willing to kill Belkar than Belkar would die.

I completely agree with this statement, and find the idea a bit TOO appealing. In any case, if Rich wants the characters to (more or less) stay together, than that is what will happen. IMO, Belkar should stay till the end, though he's starting to do things that http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.ph...esTheLineTwice

I hope he gets to a more controlled state so that he can be funny and not accidentally cross the line LESS than twice.

[SpaceNinja]

I know that's the rationalisation they use, but really, it doesn't make sense. Normal people don't say: "Hey, that guy's a murderous psycho. He'd make a great travelling companion, because we could constrain him!" They travel with Belkar because he's a member of the party - the constraining thing is just the IC justification.

If we're going to insist that a fantasy comic specializing in metahumor be strictly realistic, then sure, I think it's perfectly realistic that a tiny band of overmatched heroes trying to save the entire world from certain destruction would permit a crazy person to help them stop the apocalypse.

Hell, I think they'd team up with Xykon if they thought it would help. Nale's killed more people than Belkar for just as little reason - if they were could choose whether he would give them mostly-loyal, catch-free assistance or just go kill people willy-nilly, I don't imagine that the 'realistic' OOTS would hesitate. People make decisions like that all the time.

[Paragon Badger]

Here's the thing.

There is no party anymore.

Haley/Celia/Belkar doesn't work.

Roy/Belkar/Anyone else does.

[Oakianus]

I don't think it's a betrayal of their alignment at all, even if he does evil, for them to accept help when they absolutely need it. Trebly so, this is true of Haley. She's Chaotic Good. She breaks it down right at the beginning of the strip; Roy is the one who's responsible for everyone else's actions, she's an individualist who is Chaotic.

Ergo, she does what she perceives as the best course for doing Good in the world while remaining unfettered by society as a whole. Belkar's actions are evil, but the fact remains that she is traveling with him because she absolutely needs his blade right now. She knows she'll die without him, and if she does then the rest of the Order will probably never find them and Xykon will rule the world. She's not responsible for what Belkar does, and it's in no way an alignment violation for her to travel with him when she knows that he will fight for the greater good.

[Felixaar]

And how do you reconcile the fact that he'd be doing far far more evil when not constrained by the party?

Deaaaaaath.

The Oracle though Belkar was going to die soon - I wonder if it's coming in this plot arc? Will the party decided not to resurrect the little bugger and regret it later? Who knows?

[Werewindlefr]

I know that's the rationalisation they use, but really, it doesn't make sense. Normal people don't say: "Hey, that guy's a murderous psycho. He'd make a great travelling companion, because we could constrain him!" They travel with Belkar because he's a member of the party - the constraining thing is just the IC justification.

There's -or at least, was- also the Lawful part of Roy's alignment. He'd want to "get rid" of him, which basically means killing him since he admits puting Belkar in jail wouldn't work, but there's the moral responsibility towards group members. He actually mentioned something like that in OotS 285.

[Laurentio]

Come on, people. Roy (and the others) know to be characters in a RPG. We can suppose they don't know their respective players identity, but they know, for sure, that Belkar is a "party member", and any rationalization is just, well, a rationalization.
And this bring to the main theme or this thread: yep, characters with a too different moral setting are a pain in the arse. I don't like it as a player, nor as a master. But if it's to be played, some rationalization helps to keep roleplaying.
Otherwise, is the "lame lampshading festival". I had players trying to use idiotic reasons to look the other way while the thief was busy killing and robbing the same NPCs they rescued a moment before... and asking for the XPs.

In this cases, I argue the player, not the character. And we know(1) that GM of Order of the Stick is a girl, and Belkar the boyfriend's character.

Laurentio

(1) Actually, no. Just my opinion

[Werewindlefr]

And we knowthat GM of Order of the Stick is a girl, and Belkar the boyfriend's character.

It's the opposite. Belkar's player is a girl, and happens to be the DM's girlfriend.

[Saph]

If we're going to insist that a fantasy comic specializing in metahumor be strictly realistic, then sure, I think it's perfectly realistic that a tiny band of overmatched heroes trying to save the entire world from certain destruction would permit a crazy person to help them stop the apocalypse.

But Belkar isn't helping them. He's just randomly killing whoever he feels like, which sometimes happens to help them and sometimes doesn't. Belkar isn't on the OotS's side, and he's come right out and said that the only reason he didn't betray Haley to Xykon is because it didn't occur to him.

It just doesn't make any sense anymore. Haley or Roy could have found ten replacements for Belkar by now. And it's not as if they like him or anything.

This is why I'm saying that the OotS has come to the point where the party members look at each other and say, "Okay, we've got five good-to-neutral, reliable PCs, and one psychotic maniac who everyone hates and who has no loyalty to the group at all. Maybe it's time somebody left."

- Saph

[gm_rand]

I think the lack of sense and logic that you're brining up is what makes the strip funny. Yes it has a good fantasy storyline but really for good comedy some times you have to throw logic and sense out the window.

[Roderick_BR]

Yeah, the "they need him" excuse can only last so long, but as Haley said, she would have given him the boot if she didn't need all the help she can get. That includes Celia as she's bothering Haley, so you can see the problems she's into.
Actually, if it were not for Azure City's fall, they would probably have already left the Belkster in a blue cell long ago.

So, yeah, the "they need him" excuse will have to last for a long time.
Remember what the angel told Roy, also. Their guidance keeps Belkar slaughter to a minimum, and drive his killings towards good results.

Heh, that always reminds me a friend that once played a LE fighter, and at some point he, in character, was worried that he was doing too much "good deeds" (mostly killing villains and monsters), and was starting to "soften up and becoming a sissy like the others" (ie, becoming good).
And that was the only character in that campaign that even got married! The girl was a normal NPC commoner from one of the towns they saved.

[Wikkin]

He has had several opportunities to betray them and hasn't.

He won't admit it, but I think he likes them all.

[Lupy]

After the group gets together again Celia will demand they deal with him, Roy will probably agree, and get ready to attack. V will certainly agree, Haley wont have a problem with it, Durkon might not like him, but will he kill him? And Elan, the most "good" person there, would he watch as Belkar was beaten to death, stabbed, and burned? And Belkar could kill anyone there but Roy and would take some of them with him, probably Haley and Celia.

[Alfryd]

"Okay, we've got five good-to-neutral, reliable PCs, and one psychotic maniac who everyone hates and who has no loyalty to the group at all. Maybe it's time somebody left."

I should, in fairness, point out that Elan's collateral-damage-related body count probably rivals Belkar's by this point, albeit with less malice aforethought to blame. Otherwise, I agree.

Belkar's actions are evil, but the fact remains that she is traveling with him because she absolutely needs his blade right now. She knows she'll die without him...

She knows nothing of the sort. A rogue has plenty of options for dealing with intermittent hazards aside from 'hiding behind the meat shield', and Belkar has always been a double-edged sword.

The CG non-responsibility argument doesn't cut it, precisely because Haley is using Belkar for her own purposes. The means you use to a given end still reflect on your alignment, even if outweighed by eventual results, and I am by no stretch convinced Belkar will be more of a help than a hindrance.

He won't admit it, but I think he likes them all.

A Charm Person spell was enough to have him set to butcher every member of the Order (aside from Elan- but including Haley)- and loot their corpses for magic items.
There are exactly two instances of at least plausibly good behaviour on his part (sharing rations in DCF, and rescuring Elan.) Aside from this, Belkar has steadily gone from bad to worse.

[Demented]

"This would never have happened if your father Roy was still alive."


I've always gotten the sensation that if Belkar ever tried something like killing an innocent gnome while Roy was alive, there'd be a greatsword in that little halfling's future. Counter-arguments would probably find an example of where Roy should have killed Belkar but didn't (providing that Roy's sense of honor disallows him from killing Belkar just for existing), but it's that sensation that keeps Belkar in check. So long as Roy could keep Belkar in check, he was a (barely) tolerable party member, or perhaps a prisoner-conscript. The party never absolutely needed him, but he served useful and was at least as much of an asset as he was a liability.

Despite all that was said about Haley becoming a better leader, she still doesn't have what it takes to keep someone like Belkar in check. Even if she threatened him, she probably doesn't like the odds of going up against a ruthless melee fighter, despite his poor character build. That's her problem alone, not the party's.

I'm pretty sure Durkon or Vaarsuvius would have even less patience with Belkar at 'full bloom', not to mention they'd have enough firepower to back up their threats. At least, Durkon does. Vaarsuvius needs a suggestion'd Black Dragon.

Elan, well...
His only saving grace is that he's probably not of a sufficient challenge rating to give Belkar any experience.

[CasESenSITItiVE]

i think you missed the point entirely.

the Order of the Stick has always been a comic that makes fun of some of the cliches of rpgs and fantasies, including character cliches, and that one evil Chaotic Stupid character in the good party happens to be an rpg cliche.

bottom line, belkar will probably stay for the very reasons you gave outlining why you think he will get the boot

as long as there are those who continue to find belkar funny (which there are, myself included) he probably won't be going anywhere

[Lupy]

Actually, I thought about it, Roy will be a lower level when he comes back wont he? Okay, so Celia says what happens and Roy forgets and attacks him. Belkar rages as V prepares to cast and Haley flanks him. Belkar goes beserk on Roy and and gets knocked back, shot by Haley, and Shot at by V. V hurts Haley and Roy too. Belkar curses giving up his jumping ring and attacks V, easily hitting mondo damage. Then Roy hits him away. He throws a knife and K.O.s V. Haley shoots, he now runs for Haley, only to get a face full of Elan's Rapier. Roy runs up and full attacks, then Belkar hits him back. Elan stabs again, and Haley shoots. Belkar is very low on Hp. He stabs Elan multiple times and then gets behing Haley. Haley is no longer flanking. By now Durkon has V back up. As a last blow Belkar throws his last knife and gets a crit. He kills V, thus fulfufilling the prophecy. Roy kills him, and Durkon heals them all. They discuss how to raise V, Elan asks about Belkar, but Roy ignores it..

Oops, forgot Celia. I don't really know if she would stick around or not, anybody?

[pjackson]

CasESenSITItiVE is right.

But it seems that some people have forgotten the Mark of Justice.
E.g. if Belkar were with Roy when he attacked the gnome Roy would have activated the MoJ.

Even though Roy now knows how evil Belkar his he would keep him in the OotS because the MoJ would allow him to control Belkar, and as Belkar is would technically be a prisoner under Roy's control Roy would see it as his duty to protect Belkar so long as Belkar obeyed the rules.
Belkar clearly does not want to risk activating to MoJ. He would not let Roy see him commit any significant evil act.

So though there would still be conflict (making for good stories) the OotS could work together again, once Roy is back.

[Niknokitueu]

In the end, all that is required for multi-alignment parties to work well together is for those members that can mitigate their true nature to do so whenever they are around those that cannot do so.

(Also the term 'no witnesses' can solve many possible problems.)

eg. in the OotS case, Belkar is an evil thug, but restrains himself when Roy is around. Originally this would have been due to him fearing fighting Roy, now it would be to avoid Roy invoking the MoJ.

Haley is another alignment that is radically different to Roy's. Note that she 'toes the line' whenever she is in Roy's sight.

Roy, in his turn, has always underplayed his 'LG'-ness. He is Lawful, and he is Good, but if he was to try to be extreme he would either arrest Haley (or Belkar) or (more likely) kill them (knowing that no jail could hold them for long).

I have recently played in a campaign that had a LG paladin, a CG cleric, a CN fighter, a N druid, a LG mage and a CG theif. Everyone toed the line near the paladin, and when some of the more mercenary members 'slipped up', they made sure to leave no witnesses. (The Fighter, for example, bounced around his CN boundaries a lot, doing a lot of good deeds with the party, and just a few nasty deeds on his own.)

The party worked because everyone cooperated. If we had all really played to the extremes of our alignments, the campaign would have self-destructed before the end of the first adventure.

Have Fun!
Niknokitueu

[pendell]

I don't think it's a betrayal of their alignment at all, even if he does evil, for them to accept help when they absolutely need it. Trebly so, this is true of Haley. She's Chaotic Good. She breaks it down right at the beginning of the strip; Roy is the one who's responsible for everyone else's actions, she's an individualist who is Chaotic.

Which is why, as far as I'm concerned, Haley should be fired as second-in-command. If you're in a position of leadership, you're responsible for the entire group, not just yourself. A chaotic individualist is completely unsuited for such a task.

I would treat Belkar as I would a hand grenade ... keep him carefully constrained and out of sight until I found a nice big group of enemies, then whip the crazy guy out and pull his pin.

In some ways, he's better than a hand grenade, because he's self-aware and can be thrown multiple times.

As has been pointed out, what other choice does OOTS have? Cut his throat in his sleep? Ironically, they could probably get away with it in the OOTS verse ... the gods seem to think it's a good act to kill an evil creature (witness the massacres the Paladins do to evil creatures). So just get Durkon to do a detect evil on 'em, then cut his throat.

I consider this a non-optimal option. Dead, he contributes nothing. Alive, he can do a great deal of damage to enemies at the cost of some collateral damage to friendlies and neutrals.

Much like a hand grenade.

Spoiler

Show

Besides, it's obvious that Belkar is fated to die at some point in the strip, probably fighting evil creatures and saving the world. I say let him embrace his destiny, not thwart him

But there's a story reason as well:

Belkar acknowledges as much here

Belkar tells jokes for a living. That's his real purpose in the comic. The OOTS is stacked with straight men (Roy, V, Durkon) and Elan isn't enough. Belkar is needed to make it funny ... but if the Giant doesn't act soon, Belkar won't be able to do that. Unprovoked cold-blooded murder of innocents is not funny.

Respectfully,

Brian P.