One of my players' Paladins split off from the party because the player determined the party was too Evil for the Paladin to get along with them anymore.

So far, so good.

The problem is where he split off. In a supremely inhospitable jungle environment that was basically magic Vietnam, and was sorely testing the party's strength combined.

I didn't bother checking what happened to him since the party had left for a while, but now the player is wondering if he can bring that character back. The thing is I feel like there's a 80% chance that this Paladin would have never made it out alive, but it feels cheap to just say he died offscreen. Would it make more sense to just handwave it and say he's available to use again? Otherwise, I was going to sit down and plot out his survival path, rolling for navigation and seeing how many days it would take VS how many rations he had, that sort of thing, to see if he'd actually have made it out.

This question can be broadened to how you deal with offscreened PCs in general. Do you still track their movements and behavior with the same rigor that you'd track a normal PC "onscreen," or just GM fiat it for whatever makes the most drama or is most convenient?

Do you have time to run a solo session for him? If so, just play it out.

(If he left the party, why is that PC still in the game? Is he rejoining the party? If not, why does his fate matter?)

Quote from: Dumarest;996035Do you have time to run a solo session for him? If so, just play it out.

(If he left the party, why is that PC still in the game? Is he rejoining the party? If not, why does his fate matter?)

The player's current PC (a cultist of Asmodeus) left the party because he was too evil. He has bad luck with making PCs that fit the group. First the Paladin didn't fit because the party was too evil, so he made an evil character, except then that PC was /too/ evil, so he had to leave too.

So now that at least the party has demonstrated some willingness to push back against fellow party member's doing evil things, he's thinking about having his Paladin return from exile -- if he's still alive.

But for that option to work, I have to determine the Paladin's current status. Obviously if the Paladin died in the wilderness, then there is no way the Paladin can come back.

Maybe running it as a side session could work though, or online...

If it's an option, I'd run a solo session in person or online so the player has the satisfaction of knowing whatever happened to his paladin was fair and the result of his own choices rather than just "GM said so."

Another option that might make an interesting change of play would be to devise some "NPC's" of slightly lower level than the paladin. These would be drawn up in advance by the GM, and handed out to the players other than the paladin and of an alignment suitable to him.  Scene one would be to have the paladin rescue these folks from some unpleasant fate, and then play out the "escape from jungle" as a little baby campaign within the campaign.  The paladin either wins through or he doesn't but either way the outcome is known.  To motivate the other players you might arrange to give their regular characters some small reward for good role play on the part of the player with the temporary character.

There is absolutely no reason why you cannot have multiple characters for one player, especially if the paths don't cross.

Run the adventure for the Paladin's player, and what happens, happens.

"One Band Of Brothers Tied At The Hip" needs to die anyway.  Yeah, it's more work with multiple parties, but for 2x work you get 10^x fun.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;996074Run the adventure for the Paladin's player, and what happens, happens.

"One Band Of Brothers Tied At The Hip" needs to die anyway.  Yeah, it's more work with multiple parties, but for 2x work you get 10^x fun.

If you were gamemastering it would you handle it as a solo for just the paladin and paladin's player or would you open it up to the group, and would you tie it to something that might influence the bigger game if there was some chance that the paladin might come back?

I'd start with the Paladin, since he separated himself from the others.

Then I'd see what happened.  I would absolutely not predetermine what would happen; the point of playing the game is to see what happens.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;996074Run the adventure for the Paladin's player, and what happens, happens.

"One Band Of Brothers Tied At The Hip" needs to die anyway.  Yeah, it's more work with multiple parties, but for 2x work you get 10^x fun.

It was barely a thing even into the 90s so you can stop complaining about something that barely happens and if it does. Whats it to you? Why are you bitching about how other people at other tables play? Take your own advice.

This ends todays "Be mean to Gronan because hes being a twat against his own advice" infomercial.

To the OP.

You can just abstract it and tell the player to roll percentile dice. 01-10 and they lived and found their way back. On a 11-20 the group finds their corpse and can loot it. Anything else and the paladin bought it and no one will ever know. And thats a lesson not to make contrary characters or hie off on your own in the middle of no-where. Ornery and unruely characters are fine. But ones essentially primed grenades waiting flip out and leave are not so fine.

In the 5e group I am currently in As I have noted before. Kefra's druid liked to challenge my warlock's leadership now and then and we've had some fun arguments over how to do this or that and why just offing the prisoners, while the easiest option, is not the best option. Jan's halfling was one of those impatient types and would skip off in the middle of planning and promptly find the nearest wandering monster. Her half-orc replacement character is fairly easy going in contrast. The other two groups in this multi-group campaign have had some split ups and we picked up a PC from group A. An elven fighter.

And the 3e group I was in was really fractious. Sometimes not in a good way either. But I enjoyed the mayhem. Bemusingly it was my sorcerer and Sammas' paladin that were the ones most oft to split off and get into some absurd trouble simply from just following a lead we thought the others were too cautious to follow up on.

Your player doesn't want to make a 3rd character?  I mean the if the Palladian had to leave before its not going to be a great fit now.  

Also 2 characters in a row that are a bad fit for the party.  Is he improving?  I'm not there, but is it the characters or the player that is the bad fit.  Since they are trying to find a dude thats a good fit they aren't a griefer.  So you can work with him.  

Good luck.

Quote from: mAcular Chaotic;996033This question can be broadened to how you deal with offscreened PCs in general. Do you still track their movements and behavior with the same rigor that you'd track a normal PC "onscreen," or just GM fiat it for whatever makes the most drama or is most convenient?

Last time I dealt with it, a player dropped out of a Dark Sun game due to college. Sensing that there was a possibility the player would return, I on-the-spotted a reason:
The elemental spirits have called the character away. They are reasonably safe, but unavailable. Everyone knew it was an offscreen excuse, and it gave a bit of an adventure hook for if/when the player would return.

I feel like this is one of those situations where gameplay is more important than "realism". (In the moment, I'm sure I could retroactively explain it.)

Quote from: Omega;996194This ends todays "Be a twat" infomercial.

Fixed yer typo.

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;996269Fixed yer typo.

Looks more like you broke it.

Now get off my lawn.

So, setting aside the flinging of virtual monkey poo at each other for the moment, where have you seen players working in separate groups?

Because all I have seen since... jeez, the early 80s.... is that there is one group of players in a campaign.  People don't split up and pursue their own agendas any more.  If that's still being done anywhere I'd really like to hear about it.

In fact, that's what the OP is all about.  In Ye Olde Dayse (tm) (c) (pat pend) (reg u.s. pat off) the answer was "so now you have another player group."

Quote from: Gronan of Simmerya;996275So, setting aside the flinging of virtual monkey poo at each other for the moment, where have you seen players working in separate groups?

Because all I have seen since... jeez, the early 80s.... is that there is one group of players in a campaign.  People don't split up and pursue their own agendas any more.  If that's still being done anywhere I'd really like to hear about it.

In fact, that's what the OP is all about.  In Ye Olde Dayse (tm) (c) (pat pend) (reg u.s. pat off) the answer was "so now you have another player group."

Who wants to run X many games or has time for that though.

That and the whole point of playing with friends is playing with friends. Not playing alone.