The Right Reaction?

Please bear in mind when I write this that I don't actually have a gaming group-I'm just speaking hypothetically here.

A while back, I posted a "Would this be evil" forum where PCs, who are offended by the bullying and/or extortion of either local thugs and criminals or noble rakes out terrorizing poor people, beat the bullies up and force tham at swords' point to do degrading jobs like sweep the floors, wash the dishes, and muck out the stables, to further embarass them.

I figured that this extra embarassment would get the villains, especially the nobles, more angry at the PCs than at the innkeeper or any of the customers, and if they sought out revenge, they'd go after the PCs rather than the innkeeper.

Some posters disagreed with me, saying that the bullies would go after the innkeeper again, but I myself think that if all the PCs did was chase them away, they'd come back again and act even worse the next time. This way, at least, chances are they'll be so enraged at their humiliation that they'll go after the PCs. Remember, these guys aren't competent evil warlords or experienced liches-they're criminals whose first thought is usually revenge, rather than foresight, or young bravos who think with their (...well....you know) when they bother to think at all, and aren't necessarily smart enough to stop harassing the PCs who thrashed them physically the first time.

After all, these guys wouldn't be BBEGs, and so aren't necessarily expected to be the brightest torches in the room.

So, which action sounds more credible to you? That they'd be so enraged that they'd focus on the PCs, or be cold-blooded about it and go after the innkeeper? I personally think that, given that not everyone is known for their intelligence in the real world (and even really smart people do really stupid things more often than they care to admit), they'd go for the former.

EDIT: Chaged "latter" to "former." See what I mean about people doing stupid things more often than they care to admit?

CruelSummerLord said:

Please bear in mind when I write this that I don't actually have a gaming group-I'm just speaking hypothetically here.

A while back, I posted a "Would this be evil" forum where PCs, who are offended by the bullying and/or extortion of either local thugs and criminals or noble rakes out terrorizing poor people, beat the bullies up and force tham at swords' point to do degrading jobs like sweep the floors, wash the dishes, and muck out the stables, to further embarass them.

I figured that this extra embarassment would get the villains, especially the nobles, more angry at the PCs than at the innkeeper or any of the customers, and if they sought out revenge, they'd go after the PCs rather than the innkeeper.

Some posters disagreed with me, saying that the bullies would go after the innkeeper again, but I myself think that if all the PCs did was chase them away, they'd come back again and act even worse the next time. This way, at least, chances are they'll be so enraged at their humiliation that they'll go after the PCs. Remember, these guys aren't competent evil warlords or experienced liches-they're criminals whose first thought is usually revenge, rather than foresight, or young bravos who think with their (...well....you know) when they bother to think at all, and aren't necessarily smart enough to stop harassing the PCs who thrashed them physically the first time.

After all, these guys wouldn't be BBEGs, and so aren't necessarily expected to be the brightest torches in the room.

So, which action sounds more credible to you? That they'd be so enraged that they'd focus on the PCs, or be cold-blooded about it and go after the innkeeper? I personally think that, given that not everyone is known for their intelligence in the real world (and even really smart people do really stupid things more often than they care to admit), they'd go for the latter.

Click to expand...

Realistically, I suspect that they'd go after the PCs, as the PCs are the people directly responsible for their humiliation. Going after the innkeeper would actually be the smarter approach (the innkeeper is somebody that they know they can get one over on). Which is exactly why I suspect they wouldn't do it.

CruelSummerLord said:

(and even really smart people do really stupid things more often than they care to admit)

Click to expand...

Which is why my answer would be "all of the above". Rather than one right answer, I might quickly think up the possibilities and then roll randomly. One of the thugs might see the inn as a reminder of their humiliation and choose to burn it down rather than undertake the uncertain prospect of trying to track down a bunch of armed homeless people (the PCs). Or they might hire a wizard to put a curse on the PCs, and so on. Any reaction by the thugs can probably be justified as fitting the situation. In fact, the thugs might not all agree on their response. Maybe one of the thugs really doesn't like the others and goes to warn the PCs of what the rest of the thugs are up to.

If the PCs thrashed the bad guys bad enough that they were able to force them to do all the humiliating things you mention, I don't see them taking direct revenge against the PCs. Perhaps they would eventually figure out a way to get back at them, but "once bitten, twice shy" comes to mind here. However, the innkeeper and anybody else that witnessed their degradation would make fine scapegoats for taking their anger out on and would also serve to help them regain a semblance of their lost dignity. They might say, "I bet you liked watchin' them adventurers thrash me, eh?" Commoner: "No, m'lord. I din't see nuffin'...err... I din't like it, I mean." Bad guy: "Aww, I betcha you liked it real good!" as he begins shoving the commoner and soon begins beating him and looking around for anyone else worth pounding on.

That's just the way things go. Eventually, the bad guys might meet up with some tough guy that they think can help them settle the score with the adventurers, but going head to head with them again after the kind of butt-kicking they got would just be plain stupid. I'm talking beyond the normal level of brash stupidity.

I think different people would have different reactions, all credible (people do ... strange things, after all), and you should the NPCs do whatever you think is most appropriate for the game.