Alignment conundrum (long), Yig stay out !
- Thread starter Trainz
- Start date
I would go with consequences of their actions rather than alignment penalties, for now.
Depending on the power of the thieves' guild, I see two possibilities for the current encounter. Either the guild committed enough force to defeat their worst-case scenario of the party's capabilities or they just sent a few people to demand payment. If it's the first case, keep in mind the guild most likely has a goodly number of "enforcers" (i.e. fighters or warriors). Personally, I think the second case has more potential. The thieves have made their demand, when the PCs draw their weapons, the thieves give them one more chance with a warning that incurring the wrath of the thieves' guild is decidedly unwise, and then, if the PCs remain hostile (as they clearly will), the thieves flee before combat begins.
The thieves would then send someone to harass the party. Perhaps a thief to steal a valuable piece of equipment or two and ransom it back to the party. Alternatively, the thieves might hire or send an assassin after the party. If the party ever returned to the city, they would, of course, be in for serious trouble. This approach provides a feud that can last for a long time to come.
With regards to alignment, I suggest asking your players how they perceive their actions. Particularly in light of your statement that they normally play their alignments well. Say something like "Your actions with the thieves guild don't really strike me as good, and certainly not as lawful. How do you see them?" Ask this after the encounter in the tunnel has ended. It could be they see their actions as entirely justified, or they might realize they are pushing it a bit, and feel guilty afterwards. If you and the players clearly disagree on some interpretation of their alignment, let the players know how you will handle it in the future. It is very easy for DMs and players to perceive the same situation very differently, alignment-wise. Make very sure your players understand what they are doing, from your perspective, before changing their alignment or assigning penalties.
One way or the other, regardless of alignment, the players actions should have consequences. That is a large part of what makes the game interactive and interesting.
Depending on the power of the thieves' guild, I see two possibilities for the current encounter. Either the guild committed enough force to defeat their worst-case scenario of the party's capabilities or they just sent a few people to demand payment. If it's the first case, keep in mind the guild most likely has a goodly number of "enforcers" (i.e. fighters or warriors). Personally, I think the second case has more potential. The thieves have made their demand, when the PCs draw their weapons, the thieves give them one more chance with a warning that incurring the wrath of the thieves' guild is decidedly unwise, and then, if the PCs remain hostile (as they clearly will), the thieves flee before combat begins.
The thieves would then send someone to harass the party. Perhaps a thief to steal a valuable piece of equipment or two and ransom it back to the party. Alternatively, the thieves might hire or send an assassin after the party. If the party ever returned to the city, they would, of course, be in for serious trouble. This approach provides a feud that can last for a long time to come.
With regards to alignment, I suggest asking your players how they perceive their actions. Particularly in light of your statement that they normally play their alignments well. Say something like "Your actions with the thieves guild don't really strike me as good, and certainly not as lawful. How do you see them?" Ask this after the encounter in the tunnel has ended. It could be they see their actions as entirely justified, or they might realize they are pushing it a bit, and feel guilty afterwards. If you and the players clearly disagree on some interpretation of their alignment, let the players know how you will handle it in the future. It is very easy for DMs and players to perceive the same situation very differently, alignment-wise. Make very sure your players understand what they are doing, from your perspective, before changing their alignment or assigning penalties.
One way or the other, regardless of alignment, the players actions should have consequences. That is a large part of what makes the game interactive and interesting.
RigaMortus
Explorer
shilsen said:
Not all the time. I personally think intent determines alignment. Would a person who ponders murder but is afraid to carry it out for fear of getting caught, not be considered evil?
Corlon
First Post
RigaMortus said:
or maybe neutral or good depending on the circumstances
Thieve's guilds are some bad enemies...generally I'd think 500 gp wouldn't be too much for a party to pay, they might even be able to diplomacy their way into getting the password through the tunnel.
Even if they subdue the rogues instead of killing them, make the rogues give them reason never to return to that town, or possibly the surrounding area as well.
Trainz
Explorer
Wow. Superb feedback.
I definitely want to give a shot at that godfather roleplaying, I do a great imitation of his voice.
I think they're taking the "we won't take crap from NO-ONE" attitude, which is very awesomely stupid in this case, because they craft their own items, and they used to go through the guild to acquire components for the craftings.
Well, live and learn I guess.
I definitely want to give a shot at that godfather roleplaying, I do a great imitation of his voice.
I think they're taking the "we won't take crap from NO-ONE" attitude, which is very awesomely stupid in this case, because they craft their own items, and they used to go through the guild to acquire components for the craftings.
Well, live and learn I guess.
Nail
First Post
....Or, in this case: "live and get poor quickly".
If they've been using the thieves guld as a source for several things, then they are being colossally pig-headed about this. They've just made their lives *much* harder. Still, I can't help but ask "Could it have been the way in which the DM portrayed the original incident?"
More over, you'll want to figure out two or three ways the PCs could make the trouble "go away"...and then give subtle hints about those options. Pften times even the best players are caught short of good ideas.
BTW: that "enforcer" idea up there was a good 'un. The enforcers need not be Rogues.....heh, heh, heh.......
If they've been using the thieves guld as a source for several things, then they are being colossally pig-headed about this. They've just made their lives *much* harder. Still, I can't help but ask "Could it have been the way in which the DM portrayed the original incident?"
More over, you'll want to figure out two or three ways the PCs could make the trouble "go away"...and then give subtle hints about those options. Pften times even the best players are caught short of good ideas.
BTW: that "enforcer" idea up there was a good 'un. The enforcers need not be Rogues.....heh, heh, heh.......
Cheiromancer
Adventurer
If the PCs want to take on the Thieves' Guild, there is no reason they couldn't, and win. If the PCs are tough, there is no reason why they couldn't do so much damage to the Guild that it is effectively shut down.
But then who would the PCs buy components from? You might want to increase prices and add in delays for deliveries. There may be political upheavals in town, if the Guild was influential. And who (or what?) will replace the Guild? Probably something worse (in the way of wererats and/or beholders).
Or heck, maybe the town is better off without the Guild! Perhaps they can get better prices now that the Guild is not taking its cut. Just because they were arrogant doesn't mean that they could not have done good. After all, good intended actions sometimes turn out badly, don't they? What I am suggesting is that you might want to reward the PCs for this "alignment violation."
Mind you, I like trying to corrupt my PCs. I tend to reward them for doing bad things. My reasoning is that that is why evil people do evil things; because of the rewards (both short-term and long-term). Good people have to settle for self-respect and honor.
But then who would the PCs buy components from? You might want to increase prices and add in delays for deliveries. There may be political upheavals in town, if the Guild was influential. And who (or what?) will replace the Guild? Probably something worse (in the way of wererats and/or beholders).
Or heck, maybe the town is better off without the Guild! Perhaps they can get better prices now that the Guild is not taking its cut. Just because they were arrogant doesn't mean that they could not have done good. After all, good intended actions sometimes turn out badly, don't they? What I am suggesting is that you might want to reward the PCs for this "alignment violation."
Mind you, I like trying to corrupt my PCs. I tend to reward them for doing bad things. My reasoning is that that is why evil people do evil things; because of the rewards (both short-term and long-term). Good people have to settle for self-respect and honor.
Trainz
Explorer
Cheiromancer said:
No way in hell.
It's all fine and dandy for a bunch of good aligned characters to shut down a thieve's guild.
BUT, it's not if you used to deal with the guild and just now decide to frag them over because all of a sudden they become inconvenient to your current goals, which is to use their tunnel without their permission.
Similar Threads
