Upgrade your account to a Community Supporter account and remove most of the site ads.
Rocket your D&D 5E and Level Up: Advanced 5E games into space! Alpha Star Magazine Is Launching... Right Now!

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Steel_Wind" data-source="post: 2226886" data-attributes="member: 20741">I use them from time to time (read: very rarely) to illustrate that there has been remarkably  inconsistent roleplaying choice made in game that has un contrary to the root of their class or race without just cause.  I tend not to do this for mere alignment penalties.  It needs to be more than that.Here is an example from my current cmapign and the only XP penalties I've assessed arose out of this incident.A Lawful good Wizard who permits torture in his presence is, well, a bad- ass Mofo who will choose an expedient path where it's necessary. Repeated over time, this would indicate a shift to Lawful Neutral or worse, but that's a different topic: it's not a manner of XP penalties.Same incident, 2 lawful good Knights of Solamnia permitted torture of a humanoid in their presence.  One walked away claiming the suden need to go be somewhere else while the other remained as a witness - but in the first case there was no essential difference in the act - as it was wilfull blindness.There was no suggestion that an innocent's life was being saved or the state's vital interests were at stake or some other mitigating factor to justifiy the torture.  IT was a matter of expediency - pure and smple.This went beyond an alignment variation, but went to the heart of KoS' Honour Bound feat, their devotion to the Oath and the Measure as Squires of the Crown and their alignment.  Taken together - this was an act which was simply contrary to the characters they were supposedly playing and they knew it.  They permitted it because it was expedient and another player in the group was pressing to do it.  I assessed a 50 XP point penalty to each in the XP log. (Conversely, I sometimes award XP for sticking to one's guns in difficult situations, so sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander.) It was minor penalty and was only intended as a caution to not take the expedient path again and expect to remain a True Knight.The players understood the penalty and the matter was left resolved.  It was not the first time the quandary presented itself in the campaign and I am sure it will not be the last.Significant penalities of, say, 1,000 XP would be met with hard looks from players I'm sure.  A penalty to some players might be anathema in some gaming circles.  I won't say what's right and what's wrong on any one-size-fits-all basis, but in the above example, I felt it an appropriate minor penalty and underscored the issue without turning it into a meta-gaming issue IMC.  YMMV.</blockquote>

Verification