Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="the Jester" data-source="post: 5751885" data-attributes="member: 1210">Yes it's fair. No grey areas shouldn't be absent. No, modern sensibilities shouldn't apply (in my campaign), but that depends on the setting.In my campaigns, evil is about the same as good on the "Easy & Cool" scale. I'm not quite sure what you mean by "Should players internalize the consequences of evil PC actions, or is it just a non-immersive game where anything goes?"- I'm not out to teach any life lessons, I'm out to run a game where the players lead the action. If their evil actions have consequences, so be it. Their good actions will too. But that doesn't mean that the game is non-immersive- this isn't a binary at all.I absolutely disagree with Klaus here:A moral dilemma only burns the world down if the dilemma is, "Do we set the world on fire?" If the pcs imc raid a goblin outpost and slay all the warriors, they decide what to do with the females and young. Repercussions and consequences emanate from everything the pcs do. Often there are negative aftereffects to a party's actions in a given town once they leave (that corrupt guard they slew? His family has to turn to prostitution or starve), but they may never know about them. Or care, if they know. Or it might be the hook for another adventure later. All of this is very much dependent on play style. If your style and your group is such that they will be ruined by having tough choices have consequences, maybe it's better to leave these situations out. For myself, I don't play with groups like that. My players know that I'm vicious and mean and more than willing to put them in no-win situations with no solution in mind. I, as the dm, create the problems, I don't solve them for the pcs. That's their job.</blockquote>

Verification