D&D General Fighting Law and Order

[bloodtide]

This is a problem as old as the game: How does a DM get the players to stop just outright slaying all NPCs, but more specifically the "good guys". Assuming that the PCs are at least sort of good, or at least want open access to good/neutral civilization.


This is not a problem in my Hard Fun Old School Unfair Unbalance style games. So here is what happened over the weekend:

Another DM could not make it to his game, so he asked me to cover for him. He gave me his notes, but we had no time to chat. So it's an urban set game, I'm not sure it it's published or homebrew as I only had his notes. Last game the PCs did a task for an NPC, and the game ended at a big party. This game picks up at the party. The players have fun for a bit and then the plot kicks off: the NPC is found murdered...and the PCs get blamed for it. The PCs surrender and get taken to jail. They get informed that they will spend the night in jail as the judge won't be in until morning. The players panic a bit here and try to escape...but fail. As per the plot, later that night a shadowy figure shows up and offers to free the PCs if they do a job for him. The PCs agree to this magically bound quest. While the PCs could have made a quiet escape....they don't. The guards get alerted and alarms are sounded.

And as the city guards attempt to recapture the escaping prisoner PCs, the PCs just go full blown murderhobo on all the city guards. So this is the good city where a lot of the rest of the game is set, going by the notes. And the PCs getting arrested for falsely killing the NPC, that they could have been found innocent for, does not even matter now. The PCs have now just become the worst mass murderers in city history killing many guards and such.

The players never give any of this role playing any thought. They are LOCKED into the idea that ANY combat encounter MUST be a murderhobo slaughter fest to the death. A guard hits them with a net, they must use thier most deadly weapons, spells and abilities to do a ton of damage and slaughter the guard.

After the slaughter fest, the PCs flee the city and go to hide in some caves. And this ends the adventure for the night. Of course, next game brings up the problem: what will the city do about the most vile and evil mass murderers in all of history. Sure you could just ignore it. But most DMs like to have a bit more 'reality based games' where consequences matter.

I sent the game notes to the games DM, and he was a bit shocked the players did the murderfest. There is a chance, he said, he might need me to cover the game next week. So that puts it back to me of what might happen. My reaction would be the super harsh way...killing the characters. And maybe reseting the game with some time travel or something like that.

But this leaves the issue of talking to the players. I'm not really a fan of talking. They think they did nothing wrong by slaughtering so many NPCs, but then still "get" that they had to flee the city as they are now mass murderers. I know from many past "talks" that nothing much will come from such a talk. I'm sure the players will say "anything in the game that gets in my characters way will be slaughtered!!!!!!", as that is exactly what they did.

But....here I am. Asking for maybe another view point? Is there anything new to say on this topic? I guess someone might say that a game must have a session zero where the DM very slowly and carefully tells the players the way good, evil, slaughter and common sense work in the game. Though in this case it's not "my" game. Still the players "get" that it was wrong to slaughter all the guards......but that did NOTHING to stop them.

So, anyone?

 

[Dioltach]

I think one problem is that players sometimes tend to think of a stand-in DM as "doesn't really count". It's a free pass to wreak some havoc. The cat's away and all that.

This, coupled with the idea that "anyone who stands in my character's way is automatically evil and deserves to die" will often lead to a slaughterfest like you described.

Really, the PCs' only defence is "my player made me do it, I was under the influence of a chaotic force." They could agree to atone for their deeds, for example going on a quest for a mass Resurrection or something. Or they'll have to find evidence that the town is secretly evil and they were right all along in slaughtering everyone.

Either way: good luck!

 

[UngainlyTitan]

Loss of agency, Players hate loss of agency. They pretty much will do anything to avoid it, murderhobo or even risk a near guaranteed TPK.
That is one thing, video game logic is another.
I am kind of amazed they allowed their characters to be imprisoned in the first place.
And yes, genre bounds should have been set before hand.

 

[overgeeked]

In all, it honestly sounds like the rowdy kids in class taking advantage of the substitute teacher, but here goes anyway...

This is a problem as old as the game: How does a DM get the players to stop just outright slaying all NPCs, but more specifically the "good guys". Assuming that the PCs are at least sort of good, or at least want open access to good/neutral civilization.

Easy. Enforce the logical consequences of their actions.

the NPC is found murdered...and the PCs get blamed for it. The PCs surrender and get taken to jail.

Wow. I've literally never seen a PC group willingly surrender to anyone in almost 40 years of RPGs.

They get informed that they will spend the night in jail as the judge won't be in until morning. The players panic a bit here and try to escape...but fail. As per the plot...

There's one big problem. Don't prep plots.

later that night a shadowy figure shows up and offers to free the PCs if they do a job for him. The PCs agree to this magically bound quest. While the PCs could have made a quiet escape....they don't. The guards get alerted and alarms are sounded.

And as the city guards attempt to recapture the escaping prisoner PCs, the PCs just go full blown murderhobo on all the city guards...

Okay. So there are more guards. In a city of any size there are going to be a few hundred guards. Someone, anyone, realizes what's happening and they'd ring the alarm bells, waking the entire city...especially all the guards. Who would converge on the PCs as soon as they could, a few minutes maybe.

But most DMs like to have a bit more 'reality based games' where consequences matter.

Yep. That's how you train the players to not do that, enforce the consequences in game. So, this "plot" is shot to hell and the players have no one to blame but themselves. Also, the referee shouldn't be prepping plots, it puts them into situations like this, which remove the players' ability to choose. The referee either forces the players to do what the ref wants, or the ref tosses their prep. Most refs opt for the former, unfortunately. It's a lesson for the ref as much as the players.

I sent the game notes to the games DM, and he was a bit shocked the players did the murderfest. There is a chance, he said, he might need me to cover the game next week. So that puts it back to me of what might happen. My reaction would be the super harsh way...killing the characters. And maybe reseting the game with some time travel or something like that.

Uh...don't do that. Time travel and it was all a dream are the worst possible outcomes. Unless the guards have some way of knowing where the PCs are, they wouldn't be likely to find them. If the PCs go back to town, yep...arrest and execute them. Logical consequences for their actions. If the PCs reveal themselves to anyone, there's a chance they will turn in the PCs for whatever reward the city is likely to offer. The only way the players will learn to not do this kind of stuff is to enforce the logical consequences. Who knows, they might enjoy their new bandit campaign.

But this leaves the issue of talking to the players. I'm not really a fan of talking.

It's always infinitely better to talk to the players. They're playing a game that lets them make choices. Just because the ref doesn't like those choices doesn't mean the ref should take their choices away. They play their characters and the ref plays the world. Good refs play the world as if it were a real place, with people reacting as if they were real. Arresting murderers is just what good societies do. If they don't want to be arrested, they shouldn't have murdered a heap of people.

They think they did nothing wrong by slaughtering so many NPCs, but then still "get" that they had to flee the city as they are now mass murderers. I know from many past "talks" that nothing much will come from such a talk. I'm sure the players will say "anything in the game that gets in my characters way will be slaughtered!!!!!!", as that is exactly what they did.

Yep. And respond accordingly. The city puts a bounty on their heads and hires other adventurers to hunt down the PCs. The PCs are now the targets of other adventuring parties. Build better and better NPCs to go hunt them down. Either they'll learn or they won't. Either way, you're all still playing the game. The players making the choices for their characters and the ref making choices for the world. It may not be what the original ref wanted, but it's at least partially their fault for having anything like a plot planned out.

But....here I am. Asking for maybe another view point? Is there anything new to say on this topic? I guess someone might say that a game must have a session zero where the DM very slowly and carefully tells the players the way good, evil, slaughter and common sense work in the game. Though in this case it's not "my" game. Still the players "get" that it was wrong to slaughter all the guards......but that did NOTHING to stop them.

So, anyone?

Yeah. That's how most players just are in my long experience. Regardless of the listed alignment on their sheet, the vast majority of PCs default to either chaotic evil or lawful evil. They do what they want, whenever they want, and whatever benefits them the most regardless of the law, chaotic evil...or they use the law to get what benefits them the most, lawful evil.

If that's the game they want to play and you're willing to run it (or the original ref is willing), then cool...have fun. If you're not interested in that kind of game, bow out.

 

[payn]

Part of this is the utter lack and/or efficiency of non-lethal combat in many D&D fantasy RPGs. The PCs fleeing capture and justice can be rectified if there isn't a pile of bodies in the way. Another good tool is to engage chase rules (if applicable) instead of combat rules for this kind of thing. Ultimately, this is why I skip framing the PCs and capturing them scenarios. That sort of scripted game requires an understanding of what exactly is expected of the table.

I'd not play this out any further. The PCs will just keep murderhoboing until they are overwhelmed. I doubt you can retcon this behavior on the table.

 

[Lanefan]

This is a problem as old as the game: How does a DM get the players to stop just outright slaying all NPCs, but more specifically the "good guys". Assuming that the PCs are at least sort of good, or at least want open access to good/neutral civilization.

The bolded is the source of all such problems. Drop that assumption and these problems go away.

Another DM could not make it to his game, so he asked me to cover for him. He gave me his notes, but we had no time to chat. So it's an urban set game, I'm not sure it it's published or homebrew as I only had his notes. Last game the PCs did a task for an NPC, and the game ended at a big party. This game picks up at the party. The players have fun for a bit and then the plot kicks off: the NPC is found murdered...and the PCs get blamed for it. The PCs surrender and get taken to jail. They get informed that they will spend the night in jail as the judge won't be in until morning. The players panic a bit here and try to escape...but fail. As per the plot, later that night a shadowy figure shows up and offers to free the PCs if they do a job for him. The PCs agree to this magically bound quest. While the PCs could have made a quiet escape....they don't. The guards get alerted and alarms are sounded.

And as the city guards attempt to recapture the escaping prisoner PCs, the PCs just go full blown murderhobo on all the city guards. So this is the good city where a lot of the rest of the game is set, going by the notes. And the PCs getting arrested for falsely killing the NPC, that they could have been found innocent for, does not even matter now. The PCs have now just become the worst mass murderers in city history killing many guards and such.

At any point did you ask the players if their PCs were striking to subdue* rather than kill, if only to toss out the reminder that doing so was an option for them?

* - or however that's handled now.

The players never give any of this role playing any thought. They are LOCKED into the idea that ANY combat encounter MUST be a murderhobo slaughter fest to the death. A guard hits them with a net, they must use thier most deadly weapons, spells and abilities to do a ton of damage and slaughter the guard.

After the slaughter fest, the PCs flee the city and go to hide in some caves. And this ends the adventure for the night. Of course, next game brings up the problem: what will the city do about the most vile and evil mass murderers in all of history. Sure you could just ignore it. But most DMs like to have a bit more 'reality based games' where consequences matter.

I sent the game notes to the games DM, and he was a bit shocked the players did the murderfest. There is a chance, he said, he might need me to cover the game next week. So that puts it back to me of what might happen. My reaction would be the super harsh way...killing the characters. And maybe reseting the game with some time travel or something like that.

Were it me, I'd play it out as normal, with the PCs havign become wanted fugitives due to their own actions. Does the city have the resources to effectively track and then capture or kill the characters? Do the characters have the means to get further away, maybe even to another country?

What I wouldn't do is just kill the characters out of DM spite; and I sure the hell wouldn't reset it with time travel.

But this leaves the issue of talking to the players. I'm not really a fan of talking. They think they did nothing wrong by slaughtering so many NPCs, but then still "get" that they had to flee the city as they are now mass murderers. I know from many past "talks" that nothing much will come from such a talk. I'm sure the players will say "anything in the game that gets in my characters way will be slaughtered!!!!!!", as that is exactly what they did.

But....here I am. Asking for maybe another view point? Is there anything new to say on this topic? I guess someone might say that a game must have a session zero where the DM very slowly and carefully tells the players the way good, evil, slaughter and common sense work in the game. Though in this case it's not "my" game. Still the players "get" that it was wrong to slaughter all the guards......but that did NOTHING to stop them.

Which only means they're playing characters who are more evil than are they-as-players. No problem there.

I'd just run with it, even if it throws a massive curveball at the main DM. By the sound of it this just as easily could have happened with him at the helm rather than you, so he'd still have to hit that pitch anyway.

 

[Lanefan]

Part of this is the utter lack and/or efficiency of non-lethal combat in many D&D fantasy RPGs.

Indeed, though it's a pretty easy fix to houserule that players can declare (before rolling to hit) that their attack is to subdue rather than kill, and is intended to do (mostly) non-lethal damage. Hard to do with damaging spells, but most casters will have some sort of non-lethal options available.

I'd not play this out any further. The PCs will just keep murderhoboing until they are overwhelmed. I doubt you can retcon this behavior on the table.

The bolded is exactly why I would play it out - never mind that maybe they don't get overwhelmed and go on to become the greatest murderhobos in the land.....

 

[Vaalingrade]

Honestly, this is one of those things that sounds like a good story or world building thing in ones head, but I've rarely seen fly at the table.

Sure, a murder mystery 'clear my name' plot is a classic in books and movies, but for an actual person expected to play a character involved, they're looking down the barrel of tedious waiting in a cell, a tedious and possibly unfair trail, and possibly execution should they screw up bad enough.

Given that and the fact that PCs are definitively stronger than guards, the answer is kind of obvious on the player end of things. Delete the not-fun thing with violence, which is in and of itself fun.

 

[payn]

The bolded is exactly why I would play it out - never mind that maybe they don't get overwhelmed and go on to become the greatest murderhobos in the land.....

Not my type of game, and I dont fix player behavior in game either. Knock yourself out though.

 

[Vaalingrade]

I simply do not have the time to manage the paperwork required to ethically perform operant conditioning experiments on human subjects. So I never try to 'teach' my players.