DM Advice: handling 'he can't talk to me like that' ~cuts NPC throat~ players.

[haakon1]

a city guard with a crossbow is a threat no matter how high level you get.

How about chain criticals? As in 20, 19, 20, 19 with a light crossbow would be 1d8, x2, x2, x2. 6d8 or 8d8, either way, it's a very rare possibility, but possibly important to a PC. Probably ought to require a 20 to chain, though . . .

 

[haakon1]

PC suicide- is there any problem it can't solve?

Well, I've never allowed anybody to start a character higher level than level 1, so you might not enjoy exercising this option in my campaign.

Plus, I think the DM and all the other players would seriously ask you to see a shrink or talk to somebody. Not a good sign, I think. :\

 

[haakon1]

There is nothing remotely realistic or simulationist about a setting in which all cop killers are brought to justice, every time, regardless of the circumstances. A setting like that is one dominated by narrative/thematic imperatives --ie, justice always prevails, the 'good guys' always win-- not rigorous simulation.

We (the non-evil supporters) never said the cops would succeed in killing the bad guy PC's who off'd their comrade in arms. We merely said they would try, with all their might.

And like the Terminator, they will never stop trying.

Let me give you a real life example. My hometown has 4500 people. In the 1920s, we had our one and only murder. A New York State trooper was killed by party or parties unknown. You know when the NY State troopers gave up on this case and stopped having a presence in our town? NEVER. There's still a tiny barracks -- two troopers -- there ever since they came to investigate. We have our own town police department, but I don't think the troopers are going anywhere.

 

[NilesB]

The child in question is the NPCs son. Killing a person for demanding that you turn over his child qualifies as a malign and wicked act in my book. I am certain any parent would be apalled at the thought of anyone, let alone strangers they barely knew, telling them they could not take their offspring with them. The only surprising part about the demand for his child was that he did not also demand his daughter. Perhaps he felt he could be a good caretaker for a male child, but lacked the ability or lifestyle to raise a female child.

The PCs Had been warned that Vincent was a potential danger to the infants.

When the PC's tried to get assurances of the child's safety from him, his response was a(n implicit) threat rather than any evidence of parental love. Trying to threaten a paladin into abandoning someone under their protection is neither a good nor a wise act.

Final Attack may not have meant it thus, but the party's impression that Victor was a danger to the babies is not unfounded.

 

[hong]

We (the non-evil supporters) never said the cops would succeed in killing the bad guy PC's who off'd their comrade in arms. We merely said they would try, with all their might.

And like the Terminator, they will never stop trying.

Let me give you a real life example. My hometown has 4500 people. In the 1920s, we had our one and only murder. A New York State trooper was killed by party or parties unknown. You know when the NY State troopers gave up on this case and stopped having a presence in our town? NEVER. There's still a tiny barracks -- two troopers -- there ever since they came to investigate. We have our own town police department, but I don't think the troopers are going anywhere.

The salutary lesson here is not "don't do evil things". It is "don't piss off the DM".

Which is basically the flipside of making sure not to play the people with blue circles around their feet as annoying.

 

[Fenes]

And yet the feudal system was developed in response to various crises developing out of the collapse of the Western Roman Empire, so it replaced total lack of security with security. Not as good as modern Western values, by modern standards, perhaps, but in some ways you had to take what you could get.

Paladins often get into trouble in many campaigns for picking the lesser evil, instead of finding the good solution.

But my point simply was that if one applies modern values to the "good or evil" question, then just about every feudal country, king, and noble rates as evil. Going off about how evil killing a representative of a king is seems rather odd when at the same time an evil system such as feudalism is considered ok.

If we are applying modern values, then the paladin would be forced to champion democracy, and oppose kings (with the exception of those kings who are just representative monarchs without any power).

 

[Plane Sailing]

apropos of nothing in particular, but I'm reminded of the scene in 'last action hero' where the villain has been transported from the film world into the real world and is astonished to find that things work differently here. To his amazement he can shoot someone in the street and police cars aren't screeching up to nab him straight away.

It is a neat subversion of the idea that cops are onto killers straight away in films.

Returning you to your current thread now.

 

[robertliguori]

Paladins often get into trouble in many campaigns for picking the lesser evil, instead of finding the good solution.

But my point simply was that if one applies modern values to the "good or evil" question, then just about every feudal country, king, and noble rates as evil. Going off about how evil killing a representative of a king is seems rather odd when at the same time an evil system such as feudalism is considered ok.

If we are applying modern values, then the paladin would be forced to champion democracy, and oppose kings (with the exception of those kings who are just representative monarchs without any power).

Like I said before, monarchy qua monarchy isn't evil, and democracy qua democracy isn't good. You can have a good and just king, who voluntarily limits the scope of his authority and rules fairly and without undue preference, and you can have a soceity in which 80% cheerfully repeatedly vote to harass, imprison, and murder a numerically-inferior underclass.

We haven't been given enough information to be sure, but what has been presented offers space for the theory that the Arbiters (and possibly the king they serve) are somewhere between hopelessly self-interested neutral and full-on evil. In fact, when I run into a character named Hades, I generally assume that he will not be a merry, joyous fellow, prone to random outbursts of petting puppies and kissing babies as the sheer positive force of Goodness overwhelms him with its majesty. If Vincent had dropped the mysterious stoic act to explain himself, even to claim paternal love and deflect dark suspicions would leave a whole lot space for "He and the system he embodies are evil. Roll initiative."

 

[billd91]

The salutary lesson here is not "don't do evil things". It is "don't piss off the DM".

Or at least, don't throw a change-up at the DM by making a paladin character (and other hero characters) and then play by treating any NPCs like you're a violent sociopath.

 

[hong]

Or at least, don't throw a change-up at the DM by making a paladin character (and other hero characters) and then play by treating any NPCs like you're a violent sociopath.

No, the salutary lesson _there_ is "don't play a paladin".

Seriously, trust me on the paladin. Well, that and sunscreen.