Advice requested for a FRCS game (my players please stay out!)

[janta]

Did the characters actually ever do any violence? Or was it all threatened? Was anything damaged or destroyed?

The paladin drew his sword and held both the acolyte and the head cleric at swordpoint. He directed the LN fighter to break the head cleric's fingers, but that character (or more likely the player) apparently had reservations about doing so. I guess in real world terms, this would be nothing more than a low level assault charge. Oh, they did threaten to destroy the stongboxes unless given the desired information, but I don't think they ever actually got to it.

So that's a good point. I've been concerned all along that my own reaction to what happened (I'm frankly a bit shocked at their behavior, which was being compared by the players *during the session* to Pulp Fiction) is coloring the reaction the NPCs should have.

I'd say that the temple would fine the PCs. That sounds like a merchant god to me.

You might want to develop the cleric who was threatened into some type of villian. Maybe he gets upset with his religion for just charging fines, loses his faith, gains the Ur-Priest prestige class and decides to smite the PCs. Or whatever you fancy. Maybe he just develops ill-will towards the PCs whenever he can, keeping them from money or healing or work or adequate legal counsel.

Not a bad idea, but might be a bit difficult. This NPC wasn't ever meant to be a recurring character -- in fact, the head cleric doesn't even appear in my notes for the adventure. I was winging everything that happened after the trade-off was completed. I do think he'll be spreading the word on the PCs, letting the other temples of Waukeen know that these people should not be given aid of any kind (though honestly I don't know that the characters will give a rip....) I'll have to think about whether on not I want this guy to be a recurring annoyance. Could be kind of amusing, really; these characters are viewed by most NPCs as heroes (due to lengthy backstory I won't get into here), and they usually act accordingly. Maybe he shows up at their home base, with tales of their treachery, or tries to get other people riled up against them....heh.

I furthermore think it's unfair you disallow them to justify themselves in this thread. I understand you want to restrain them from spoilers, but you should modify your inital post to remove them rather than confront them with a mandate from ENworld community to "get revenge" on them for their behavior... YMMV

I wasn't really looking for a "mandate," just some opinions on what would happen next. I'm not trying to get revenge -- at least I'd like to think I'm not -- but actions do have consequences, even in an imaginary place. They may be used to thinking of themselves as the Law, and to a certain extent they are, at least on their home turf. But they're in a new city, one that has never heard of them before, and they did not bother to identify themselves to the local authorities in any way. The Lords' Alliance is just that -- an alliance between otherwise independent cities and regions. It's not a federal government, and I don't know that being members of the LA necessarily grants them carte blanche to do whatever they like in pursuit of justice.

I don't even see that they necessarily need to "justify" their actions. I think most of what happened was in-character, with the possible exception of the paladin. It's not that I want to punish them for going in an unexpected direction, but rather that I'm looking for advice on what would happen next.

Edited to add: Iwatt, that's exactly what I was thinking when the question arose in the first place, and what I attempted to convey to the players.

 

[kanithardm]

Waukeen;s Neutral!!!!????? I thought she was NG!! Any way the paladin should go straight to LN. I would guess a fine, and the bad guys should be more cautius.