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

Reply to thread

Message: <blockquote data-quote="Manbearcat" data-source="post: 6207020" data-attributes="member: 6696971">Going to briefly resolve this so conversation can get moved along.  I don't have time to format the notes I took on my re-read of the DMG 3.x yet (which specifically relates to the topics discussed here) and that likely won't take place until the weekend.  Here is the relevant information:- Nested combat skill challenge is a success.- The relevant stakes of this skill challenge was that the Chamberlain's life was at risk.  - The PCs' 1st order intent was to save his life- 2nd order effects would be (i) earning his trust and (ii) proving their mettle.  - A successful nested skill challenge yielded (A) a + 2 (forward) for the next social skill deployed by the paladin (earned by the successful Endurance check when the Paladin shielded the chamberlain from the fiery breath barrage) and (B) a success in the greater skill challenge which, again, was "to get to and convince the  king to act or sponsor/deputize them, or grant them  resources/assets/hirelings in their effort to hunt and defeat the dragon." The battle is won.  The + 2 forward is earned via actions taken within as is a singular success in the greater challenge (the mechanical relevance of the SC).  The drake is "bloodied, battered, beaten and "backs down with severe injuries."  The Paladin marks him with burning radiance, disparaging the god of chromatic dragons and exalting Bahamut.  He tells the broken drake to "return to his  master and deliver the message that his reign is at an end."The player ended the fight with a thematic flourish, setting the stage for a Bahamut vs Tiamat showdown, stipulated that the Adult Red Dragon (primary antagonist) is a male, and wanted to ensure that the dragon knew what had happened here and that there were now heroes who oppose him and will be deposing him in short order.                            Here is the formal declaration of the relevant 2nd order effects; newly acquired fictional positioning and mechanical gain.  As the drake begins to leave, the heroes had defeated him (thus earning their gains above) in the nested challenge, he spits an epithet in a language no one understands but the Rogue.  This, again, is a specific technique.  Why a curse in an ancient language that no one knows but the Rogue?  Because its the Rogue's turn so my job is specifically challenge him, frame him into the "spotlight", and (as important as anything else) place him in the role as aggressor to resolve the conflict that I put before him.  This conflict should have thematic and utilitarian relevance to him and to what the intent/stakes are.  Here is what happened:Here is probably where most of the confusion lies.  I didn't write this well nor did I convey the most important info.  The Rogue answered and began his Bluffed geas ritual threat in the arcane language spat out by the drake.  He ended the formal threat by speaking in the common tongue so that the chamberlain could understand just what was taking place.  The Bluff was both about threatening the drake to leave this place and never take any retribution on this kingdom nor any of its inhabitants for this specific defeat (and this is my assumption as it was a very broad threat...I could ask the player and confirm if anyone cares) lest he be magically ensorcelled with the curse...but its intent was relevant to the task at hand - convincing the chamberlain that he was capable of such a thing.  As such, the fictional positioning changed (again) by the successful Bluff as it achieved its sought end; earning trust (they care about the city, its people, and even the chamberlain...and their motive is to protect it rather than to extort it for services rendered...much like the dragon is currently doing...so they aren't trading one master for another) and mettle credibility (this guy, and this group, can actually curse people with powerful rituals!) with the chamberlain.As far as much of the rest of it.  There are a lot of odd leaps, inferrences and implications that I never made.  - I don't know anything about any "just and righteous kings".  This king may be cowardly and self-serving.  He may perceive himself as just and righteous.  I don't know.  That will be determined in play.  It wasn't fixed before play, that is for sure.- If the players continue to want his help after they've uncovered (and hooked me) about the tribute, I don't know.  That is for them to decide.  It seems likely that the kingdom is invested in this battle as the citizenry is under the dragon's thumb.  The king commands the resources that can be brought to bear to repel the reign of the dragon.  At least for now, he is the intermediary.  If they feel sponsorship (whatever that means - authoritative legitimacy or actual assets/resources) is necessary to that action, then they will decide accordingly.  I don't decide that.  If the king needs to be usurped, exposed (what-have-you), later...maybe that will happen.- With respect to the tribute and drakes coming and going.  I don't know.  Again, in play.  Currently, its been only established that there is a single tribute.  Have their been many in the past?  Have they been at other locations?  Is the portico on the back-side of a mountain with the city proper obscured?  I don't know?  Maybe the people know that their king deals with dragons?  Maybe they've actually put a vote to it and are offering up their own infants (there is genre backing for this) to save their other children?  I don't know any of these questions.  Some, or none, of that may have been established before this scene unfolded via divinations or streetwise et al.  But I do know there is no authoritative answer on them at this point.</blockquote>

Verification