Reply to thread

Message

<blockquote data-quote="apsuman" data-source="post: 363341" data-attributes="member: 1769">I will add my comments and they really apply to any campaignDnD has combat.&nbsp; Your games may have more or less, but there is a reason that there are so many rules governing what you can do in combat.&nbsp; Given that, before you start a campaign and for every new player you bring into the fold, the DM and all the players need to get this whole good/evil, law/chaos thing worked out.I believe in the alignment system.&nbsp; But it ONLY works when everyone (outside the game) can agree upon some really basic tenets.The campaign setting I usually play in are sort of a medieval earth with magic.&nbsp; Meaning that there are no &quot;authorites&quot; and no &quot;judical&quot; system that modern civilizations would recognize.&nbsp; Due process is nonexistant.&nbsp; There is nobody to turn the evildoers into.So, when good characters can kill bad guys has to be resolved before it gets ugly in the game.&nbsp; While it might differ from one culture to another in your game, serious what we would call felonies would warrant death.&nbsp; &quot;You murdered my brother so I will kill you.&quot;&nbsp; Even paying someone (not an assassin) to off a bad guy would be ok with me, sort of a vigilante justice, or street justice attitude.&nbsp; Significant property crimes would be handled by any existing court/judical system.&nbsp; &quot;You stole my horse, I will send the king's men after you.&quot;&nbsp; Minor crimes again would fall to the street.&nbsp; &quot;You stole a chicken from my slaughterhouse -- I will not server you or any of yuir kin until my debt is paid.&nbsp; And then I still won't serve you.&quot;IMHO, coup de grace on a helpless bad guy is not evil.&nbsp; I would let a paladin do it.&nbsp; The only question is why is this the bad guy?&nbsp; Is he really a BAD guy?Once combat starts, unless an opponent surrenders (and maybe your characters sould give them the chance after the fight turns favorable) death is acceptable.&nbsp; I consider it an honor thingy.g!</blockquote>

[QUOTE="apsuman, post: 363341, member: 1769"] I will add my comments and they really apply to any campaign DnD has combat. Your games may have more or less, but there is a reason that there are so many rules governing what you can do in combat. Given that, before you start a campaign and for every new player you bring into the fold, the DM and all the players need to get this whole good/evil, law/chaos thing worked out. I believe in the alignment system. But it ONLY works when everyone (outside the game) can agree upon some really basic tenets. The campaign setting I usually play in are sort of a medieval earth with magic. Meaning that there are no "authorites" and no "judical" system that modern civilizations would recognize. Due process is nonexistant. There is nobody to turn the evildoers into. So, when good characters can kill bad guys has to be resolved before it gets ugly in the game. While it might differ from one culture to another in your game, serious what we would call felonies would warrant death. "You murdered my brother so I will kill you." Even paying someone (not an assassin) to off a bad guy would be ok with me, sort of a vigilante justice, or street justice attitude. Significant property crimes would be handled by any existing court/judical system. "You stole my horse, I will send the king's men after you." Minor crimes again would fall to the street. "You stole a chicken from my slaughterhouse -- I will not server you or any of yuir kin until my debt is paid. And then I still won't serve you." IMHO, coup de grace on a helpless bad guy is not evil. I would let a paladin do it. The only question is why is this the bad guy? Is he really a BAD guy? Once combat starts, unless an opponent surrenders (and maybe your characters sould give them the chance after the fight turns favorable) death is acceptable. I consider it an honor thingy. g! [/QUOTE]

Verification