D&D 5E Help Running a Courtroom Trial/Witch-Hunt

[Hriston]

Here's the scenario: The current BBEG in my campaign is an evil priest whose MO is pretending to be a good priest so he can keep tabs on the good guys. You know the old shtick. He's recently run into some legal trouble because one of the adventurers found out his secret. Basically, the priest was seen using an unholy symbol by the adventurer, which he identified as such after consulting with a real good priest, who succeeded on a Religion check, identifying the evil cult the symbol belonged to. Instead of dealing with the evil priest himself, however, the adventurer went to the local authorities and accused the priest of practicing "dark magic" which happens to be a big no-no in this community. His testimony is based on his identification of the priest's symbol. The priest was apprehended and his quarters were searched, but no symbol was found because the priest keeps it hidden in a different location when he's in disguise.

So now it's the priest's word against the adventurer's, with the other priest offering an expert opinion but having witnessed nothing. The evil priest was taken into custody because of the seriousness of the charge, but because witchcraft falls outside the local magistrate's jurisdiction, an inquisitor NPC has been sent for under the authority of the king, modeled after the Witchfinder General. This corrupt inquisitor is put in charge of the proceedings, interrogates the witnesses, and begins a general witch-hunt in the local community, the goal of which is to increase his own power and wealth.

So my question is how to run this trial in a way that's interesting and fun for the players. The probable outcome I'm forseeing is that the evil priest bribes the inquisitor to get him off, all the while deceiving him into thinking he's not really aligned with the dark forces. Important NPCs or members of the party itself are accused of witchcraft and possibly interrogated themselves. The magistrate is good and presides over all but is also deceived and will generally defer to the recommendations of the witchfinder. The PCs essentially end up in a very sticky situation that they have to deal with while the bad guy gets away. At the same time I want the players to have a lot of agency.

I don't have much experience running this type of interaction, so I was wondering if there were any good ideas for a court trial floating around out there in the minds of EN World.

 

[Hand of Evil]

First question: innocent to be proven guilty or guilty until proven innocent?

Second question: Do you have multiple laws? Civil, Guild, Church, Nobles? As this is a priest, this would be church law and as such a judge or group of judges would have to be appointed. Next would be the priest standing within the order.

Next will come the lawyers. Assigned or picked?

The Adventurers? What are their standing within the community? Burn down any taverns? Been in trouble with the law?

Proof?

 

[Sunseeker]

Character witnesses! Joe Peon the farmer, Mildrid the housewife. And don't forget the ever-lovable "stupidiity in numbers".
Remember that nobody but the one party member has seen the evil priest doing evil things (or maybe others have and are in on it), so since medieval court trials were rarely about evidence, the court would call on the local townfolk to testify on what they thought of the accused.

For the most part in these situations, everyone is usually cheating a little bit. Part of what made the early-American Puritan Witch Hunts so deadly was that everyone had reason to lie about something. Young boys and girls were covering up that they were sneaking off to have sex, husbands and wives were covering up affairs, wealthy old people were covering up other improper events. Shopkeepers were stealing, etc.... Gathering evidence against the townfolk and blackmailing them into testifying in the party's favor would be both historically accurate and a great way to give them agency in the trial.

The "twist" you might drop at the end may indeed be that of all the goings-on in the town, the "evil priest" is perhaps the least guilty of all the townsfolk. Remember that the Salem Witch Trials basically led to the destruction of the Puritan communities and way of life.

 

[epithet]

Another consideration is whether these will be bench trials (where the judge is a finder of both fact and law) or jury trials (where the jury is the finder of fact, the judge is the finder of law.) A medieval jury, unlike a modern one, was usually comprised of 12 members of the community who were most familiar with the persons and events at issue.

A jury instruction from the judge (the inquisitor) that is manifestly unfair or is a conspicuous violation of the court's charter or the common law might be a clear way to communicate to the party that the inquisitor is not interested in a fair and impartial trial. It might also serve as the basis for an appeal of the inquisitor's legal ruling to the magistrate's court, if you want to give him appellate jurisdiction over the matter.

If the PCs have become attached to certain townsfolk (girlfriends, benefactors, etc.) then the inquisitor might target one of them for inquiry, and have it made plain to the PCs that the hostile inquiry would end at the same time that the adventurer withdrew his testimony against the evil priest.

Another tactic the inquisitor will be likely to employ is the plea bargain. If an innocent townsperson stands accused, the inquisitor might threaten her with execution but agree to assess the lesser penalty of confiscation of all of her goods and possessions if she confesses to whatever she's been accused of.

In the end, the inquisitor can leave town much wealthier (and hopefully quite vulnerable on the road through the nearby forest) while one or more good honest townsfolk are left penniless and the evil priest stands acquitted of all charges. The townsfolk, including the magistrate, all know what really happened by this point, so the evil priest would be strongly motivated to get out of town. The townsfolk would also be inclined to not ask very many questions when they received word of the inquisitor being waylaid by brigands, and would smile and nod when each of their neighbors forced into false confessions spoke of the inheritance they received from their aunt or uncle in a far-off province, which came just in time to allow them to re-establish their livelihoods after the inquisition left town. Certainly no one would suspect the PCs had any hand in those events, nor would anyone feel the need to comment on why these adventurers drink for free at the local tavern thereafter.

 

[lowkey13]

*Deleted by user*

 

[77IM]

This is a really cool idea for a scenario!

Shidaku's advice about "everybody has something to hide" is excellent.

I would make it clear early on (perhaps by dropping hints, eavesdropping, or official announcement) exactly which NPCs will be called upon to testify, and then make it so that the BBEG has leverage over them -- but there is a way for the PCs to remove or reverse that leverage. For example, if the BBEG bribes the mayor, the PCs can just offer the mayor more; or if the BBEG is blackmailing the banker, maybe the PCs can eliminate the blackmail evidence. At least one NPC should be easy to win over (an encouraging easy victory) and at least one should be very, very hard to win over (so that there is still some tension in the final judgement -- or not, if the PCs knock it out of the park).

I also think the turnabout scenario -- where the PCs are under investigation! -- is way more interesting. However I wouldn't let the BBEG off the hook to early, as the players may give up on the legal solution and decide to just attack. So I'd have a distinct investigation phase and then a trial phase. And be prepared for what may happen if the PCs lose and some or all of them are found guilty of dark magic; maybe an ally helps them escape capture, or they get a pardon from the Prince in exchange for a favor, etc.

 

[Voort]

Is 'Trial by Combat' an option?

 

[GMMichael]

Last I checked, "adventurer" was not a position of prestige within the community. Adventurers are usually charlatans. The adventurer should need a lot more than "I saw him use an evil symbol."

Like, the stone embedded in a 1984 AFC Championship ring.

 

[Hriston]

First question: innocent to be proven guilty or guilty until proven innocent?

My gut instinct was innocent until proven guilty because that's the paradigm I'm familiar with. That's why I was thinking that without material evidence the PC's accusation might not amount to much. But now that I think about it, it could be more interesting the other way and might jibe better with the witchfinder's methods of interrogation, as well as giving the priest more motivation to bribe him.

This is taking place in a kind of quasi-province of Keoland, in Greyhawk, where the sway of official law is very weak. So basically, the local "magistrate" (actually the castellan of an isolated castle owned by an absentee lord) is the law. But since it's Keoland, I'm trying for as generically medieval as possible in most respects. I'm not sure which of those two alternatives was the actual custom in medieval Europe for the most part. As it relates to 17th century witch-hunts past a certain date, I believe there was a requirement to have material proof of being a witch, usually a confession from the accused that they had dealings with the Devil. By the way, the accused in this case really does have a deal with a certain devil.

Second question: Do you have multiple laws? Civil, Guild, Church, Nobles? As this is a priest, this would be church law and as such a judge or group of judges would have to be appointed. Next would be the priest standing within the order.

That's a little difficult because the priest is claiming to be a cleric of a deity that no one has heard of, in fact he made it up. He does have a couple of acolytes, but part of their disguise is that they have taken a vow of silence. In a world where the assumption is that folk will worship any of a number of gods, I'm not sure if a separate law system for the clergy is entirely appropriate. The local priest is a cleric of Pelor, however, and so I suppose he could convene a trial, but he is somewhat biased although his acolytes have been fooled by the false priest.

My thinking is that the castellan will stand as judge and that the hearing will be convened in his court. He is lawful good and so has much respect for the witchfinder, who has papers that say he is acting upon the authority of the king. In all likelihood, however, he is in fact a charlatan.

Next will come the lawyers. Assigned or picked?

The witchfinder is basically the state's prosecutor. I hadn't thought about who would represent the priest, or even if it would have been considered his right to have representation.

The Adventurers? What are their standing within the community? Burn down any taverns? Been in trouble with the law?

The one who made the accusation is a wood elf, so that could work against him in this human-dominant community. He is also a recent arrival. Some of the other party members are more well known and could serve as character witnesses. The party also has strong ties to the local merchants' guild, however, because they recently rescued some members of the guild from trouble and have been granted honorary membership, so they should have the guild's backing. The rescue has also gotten them the favorable notice of the castellan.

Proof?

Well, the priest has hidden the offensive holy symbol in the keeping of a nearby tribe of lizardmen who he has made an alliance of sorts with, possibly converting them to devil worship, so there could be an adventure hook to retrieve it, but I'm not sure if it would really prove anything. I think the idea is that the accusations will lead to the appearance of the witchfinder, and that it's his job to come up with proof.

 

[Hand of Evil]

Very few places are innocent until proven guilty. Most you end up in jail until they find time for you and then the lawyer you get is assigned.

So, it is bribe time, the more people the priest can bride the better off he will be when meeting the judge. He will start with the jailer; who will provide him with a lawyer (100GP per CHR point). From here it is all about money, the lawyer will act as the go-between and will help bride people. I would create price sheet with chances of a brides. Example: witness for the priest: 1SP for every point of CHR of the witness. 10GP for documentation proof of good deeds.