• NOW LIVE! Into the Woods--new character species, eerie monsters, and haunting villains to populate the woodlands of your D&D games.

D&D General The Fate of Bargle

Is Bargle Guilty, or Not Guilty?


I mean, of course he's guilty. But I always thought that picture of the fighter standing over Alleena's corpse made me, the player of the fighter, look suspicious.

Also- why hasn't the Patriarch resurrected his niece? Shouldn't she be able to speak on behalf of the prosecution?

I feel like the Mystatan version of Columbo or Charlie Cale could crack this case wide open...
 

log in or register to remove this ad

It wasn't murder, as it was clearly self defence. Ask yourself what Aleena was doing there? She was clearly breaking in on his household. She was discovered with the killer of his pet snake, blood still dripping from his blade. In this dark world filled with opportunitists ready to slay anyone outside our precious sanctuaries just to loot any trinkets they might find - wouldn't you have tried to protect yourselves?

As proof of him not being murderous I also present that he let the slayer of his bellowed pet get away. The magic missile was intended as a warning shot, as most clerics able to cast spells are known to be sufficiently protected by their gods to easily shrug of this spell. The spell is well known for being the weakest category of display of magical lethal force available. Unfortunately it is also known to require a living target. By targeting the precieved most likely to not take real harm from the spell, rather than the killer of his pet, he clearly demonstrated his intent to scare them away rather than kill.

It hence was a clearly propotional act of self-defence, and the defendant should be acquitted on all charges.
 

I mean, of course he's guilty. But I always thought that picture of the fighter standing over Alleena's corpse made me, the player of the fighter, look suspicious.

Also- why hasn't the Patriarch resurrected his niece? Shouldn't she be able to speak on behalf of the prosecution?
Clearly, he has, as they are seen here together in this recent painting:
1676727054817.png
 



Bargle is innocent.

Patrons in the tavern at Threshold heard Aleena ask Bargle to help her and Huxley in the abandoned caves. The two left together, and Huxley followed nearby when he saw them leave together.

On their way to the caves, Aleena hinted that there was only enough treasure for two of them, and suggested perhaps Huxley should meet with an "accident" in the caves so she and Bargle could split the treasure.

Her plan, however, was to have Huxley ambush Bargle and slay him with her help, then she would kill Huxley to keep the treasure for herself. But when Huxley over heard she was planning to double-cross him, he rushed ahead to the caves prepared to slay them both.

Bargle suspected a trap, however, and left Aleena, returning to the town. Aleena continued to the abandoned caves to tell Huxley the plan was off. Huxley ambushed her instead and killed her, then returned to Threshold, claiming he saw Barlge kill her!

However, when Barlge was arrested, there was no treasure found! Where is the treasure? Whoever has the treasure is guilty!

And so we present evidence for the defense: in Huxley's depiction, he clearly recovered the treasure himself, so is really the quilty party!
 

Huxley is trying to pin the blame on Bargle since he was seen looting the body afterwards. The fact he needed to roll a 17+ on his spells saving throws had nothing to do with it.
 



This thread has inspired me to drag out my copy of Dungeon 150 and convert Kill Bargle to 5e. I just recreated the upper level of Castle Mistamere in Dungeondraft and will work on the two lower levels later. Know me, this will likely take a couple months. :D
Did that recently and I'm running the game now. I changed it to Get Bargle instead of Kill Bargle, with the goal of capturing him alive rather than killing him.

I talk about some of it here.
 

Into the Woods

Remove ads

Top