A Moral Dilemma

[Sejs]

Try to find out why the Elder doesn't trust us and see if there's anything we can do to convince him we're okay folks who would just like to make a few purchases and move on.

Failing that, as the scenario seems to be engineered around, there're a couple options:

- Find out if the reason they won't sell to you is because they need the stuff themselves (hard times suck for everyone, after all). If that's the case, help the town out in what basic way you can spare, tighten your belts, and move on without taking anything. Maybe they'll be a little more trusting of the next group that comes along.

- If they're being immovable simply because they feel like being contrary (e.g. the 'we don't like yer kind around here, boy' scenario), and can spare the supplies but just won't, possibly have the party sneaky types lift the items needed and leave appropriate renumeration in their place, or try to nail Mr. Village Elder with a charm spell on the sly and see if that doesn't change his outlook a little bit.


So essentially, use the minimum effort rather than the minimum force. We're adventurers. We spend weeks out in the field going through ruins, hunting down exotic prey, looking for missing princesses and saving the world. We're pretty self sufficient as a point of course. Chances are whatever it is that some hayseed village has are more of a convienance than they are a necessity.


And you don't go razing places to the ground out of convienance. Even if the populace is being a bunch of standoffish jerks.

 

[Henry]

I disagree that neutral would just take what they want by force, minimal or not. Maybe some chaotic neutrals.

It's all in the definition of Neutral. To me, it implies breaking some morals if they endanger your foremost alleigance. For a Lawful Neutral, if not roughing up someone means that a large threat to the general order will be perpetrated, expect him to rough up someone. In the case of a true neutral, the foremost allegiance is to himself, or a personal interest such as family or party; if a True Neutral finds most doors closed to him, then rather than suffer, he'll take the path of lesser resistance, and try to get out of it with the goods he needs with minimum complications (including murder or wanton destruction).

I keep thinking back to Bill Bixby in the Incredible Hulk TV show, turning back from being the Hulk, stealing someone's laundry from a clothesline, and pinning a couple of bucks in their place...

 

[Kahuna Burger]

And thereby encouraging more adventurers to have to take things by force?

Well, since most of that third translated "reasonable prices for things we need to get through the winter" as won't sell, the village invested all its extra cash in a couple of fiendish dire wolverines two years ago....

Seriously, like I said, I consider it a non starter as a dillemma, because if you actually need anything this village that can't defend itself has, you are in no shape to take it. A nice plump deer goes down easier than the 7th level commoner even a thorp has, much less a potential 5th level fighter. If you want stuff that the pathetic little group of hovels has, and you don't feel like spending the time effort or spells to make it yourself, you pay for it, or move on, or you're evil.

 

[Kahuna Burger]

It's all in the definition of Neutral. To me, it implies breaking some morals if they endanger your foremost alleigance. For a Lawful Neutral, if not roughing up someone means that a large threat to the general order will be perpetrated, expect him to rough up someone. In the case of a true neutral, the foremost allegiance is to himself, or a personal interest such as family or party; if a True Neutral finds most doors closed to him, then rather than suffer, he'll take the path of lesser resistance, and try to get out of it with the goods he needs with minimum complications (including murder or wanton destruction).

I keep thinking back to Bill Bixby in the Incredible Hulk TV show, turning back from being the Hulk, stealing someone's laundry from a clothesline, and pinning a couple of bucks in their place...

Which seems to me like a middle option not listed in the poll, but anyway...

To me, being neutral means that you won't go out of your way to help anyone, but you don't actively hurt people for personal gain either. A D&D character sits in a booth with two buttons. One says "Take 5 hp damage to save a life" The other says "inflict 5 hp on a helpless innocent to get 5 gold." The good character presses the first button several times depending on how much damage he can take. The evil character presses the second button until his finger hurts. The neutral character might press the first button a couple of times if he's flush with hit points but generally just leaves the booth. The old school character discovers that the helpless innocent is a baby orc and presses both buttons together.

 

[Brain]

depends entirely on what character I'm playing.

 

[Umbran]

Depends upon what you call "much needed". Are we talking about, "our food supplies are low, so we'll have to lose some time hunting" or "You don't understand, if we dont' have three barrels of wine, we can't destroy the evil artifact and the world will end!" ?

If a party is capable of taking supplies by force, they're probably also capable of managing without. Unless you're talking about a specifc edge case, violence simply isn't called for here.

 

[smilinggm]

Voted "Leave and Seak Supplies Elsewhere"

However there is a story/adventure waiting in that village. I would encourage my party to Stock up on supplies and return as soon as possible. When my party got back, then we would investigate to see what has been happening to this village to cause them to shut their doors to strangers. To me it sounds like this village need to be rescued from something. Be that simple bandits, a vampire overlord, a repressive Barron etc...

 

[I'm A Banana]

Send in the rogue to pilfer some food and junk and leave some gold and an IOU.

Maybe he doesn't trust us, but we're saving their asses from evil, presumably. We need it more than them. We'll pay 'em back after we get our phatty lewt.

 

[LostSoul]

What if you changed the "much needed supplies" to "a much need MacGuffin"? That's how I read the question. And voted minimum force.

I think it's an interesting question. Also interesting that some people want to ratchet down the tension by saying that it doesn't/can't apply. The way I see it, it's a hypothetical question and you treat its assumptions as valid or else you aren't even answering the question.

 

[MonsterMash]

Unless the area is the the grip of a drought and famine then move on up the road, its easy enough to hunt food or the farmers along the way will probably be willing to sell food (possibly for inflated prices).