D&D General Fighting Law and Order

[Micah Sweet]

No it's not meaningless. There are multiple game effects that key to alignment, plus it's cosmically - in game - relevant (where they go on death).

In my games, mass murders are not Good aligned. Feel free to run it otherwise in yours.


I have tons of players. Just no whiny murder-hobos. They can do that naughty word at other tables; not mine.

These particular murderhobos didn't seem all that whiny to me. Based on the OP, it was their original DM who was surprised at the after-action report. We don't even know if the players had a problem with what happened.

 

[Flamestrike]

Really? That MIGHT happen.

What are the consequences if you were to punch a member of the Mafia, a street Gangster, an elected Politician, a Police officer or similar in real life?

What on earth do you think happens to a PC after the murder a member of the local Thieves guild, a Lord or a member of the town guard in game?

They are -almost certainly- going to come gunning for him, with every resource they have.

People generally don't react to friends getting killed off, by just ignoring it dude. Powerful people, and Law enforcement, doubly so.

 

[Flamestrike]

These particular murderhobos didn't seem all that whiny to me.

Thats because the DM didnt pull them up on their murder-hoboing.

They only whine when you call them out on it. Let it happen and they have no reason to whine.

Id call them out on it the instant it happened (and would also be quite firm in session zero, not to even try).

 

[Micah Sweet]

Thats because the DM didnt pull them up on their murder-hoboing.

They only whine when you call them out on it. Let it happen and they have no reason to whine.

Id call them out on it the instant it happened (and would also be quite firm in session zero, not to even try).

See, this is assuming that the DM doesn't want to allow the players to make the choice to murderhobo. In my view, the players can do whatever they want, and the world will simply react accordingly.

 

[pemerton]

The real moral of the story is that 'prison break' scenarios are very difficult to pull off well

No they're not. I've done two in the past couple of years, and they were not harder (or easier) than anything else.

But frankly I'm baffled that so many posters treat the OP's situation in this post as if it's somehow an example of functional RPGing. When it's obvious what it actually is: a game collapsing into a degenerate state because an attempt at pulling off an utter railroad was mishandled.

The idea that the GM (either the OP or the regular one) should double down on that mishandling in the name of "consequences", and so just make the game even more unsatisfactory, is frankly bizarre.

 

[Micah Sweet]

No they're not. I've done two in the past couple of years, and they were not harder (or easier) than anything else.

But frankly I'm baffled that so many posters treat the OP's situation in this post as if it's somehow an example of functional RPGing. When it's obvious what it actually is: a game collapsing into a degenerate state because an attempt at pulling off an utter railroad was mishandled.

The idea that the GM (either the OP or the regular one) should double down on that mishandling in the name of "consequences", and so just make the game even more unsatisfactory, is frankly bizarre.

First off, we don't actually know to whom in this situation it is actually unsatisfactory. Secondly, the option to scrap the campaign and start over, with clear expectations from everyone, is always there.

 

[pemerton]

First off, we don't actually know to whom in this situation it is actually unsatisfactory. Secondly, the option to scrap the campaign and start over, with clear expectations from everyone, is always there.

Here's how I know the situation is unsatisfactory:

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".

<snip>

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?

This is not an account of RPGing that was experienced as satisfactory.

As far as scrapping the campaign is concerned, I don't know why you think that's acceptable, but some sort of time travel or "just a dream" approach is not.

 

[Greenstone.Walker]

What I would do is end the game.

I'd tell the players, "I'm not interested in having you be mass murderers and sociopaths. I play games to get away from all that sort of crap in the world. Simply put, this is my hobby as well as yours and I don't want this stuff in my hobby."

As a GM, I don't GM evil players. I don't want to do it and I suspect I would not be good at it anyway.

 

[Clint_L]

1. Not a good idea to surrender control of ones campaign if you're not willing to see it go down in flames in just one session. Yes, it's just that easy...

That's what the Deck of Many Things is for!

 

[Micah Sweet]

Here's how I know the situation is unsatisfactory:

This is not an account of RPGing that was experienced as satisfactory.

As far as scrapping the campaign is concerned, I don't know why you think that's acceptable, but some sort of time travel or "just a dream" approach is not.

Because the first option doesn't rewrite history or pretend that actions taken in game and intended to have occurred actually didn't. Starting over closes that line cleanly and allows them to make something new, hopefully something that every one will potentially enjoy.