D&D (2024) Heroes of the Borderlands

[Micah Sweet]

As stated, I wouldn't have them there in the first place.

What would be your explanation for that?

 

[Tales and Chronicles]

Caves of Chaos II: Oops, all Xvarts!

That'd be cool. Add some warlocks of Raxivort and one of those newfangled rat king thingy and you have a great low level creepy gonzo adventure

 

[Micah Sweet]

"Ok kids. I know we just slaughtered your tribe, but we're going to let you leave the only home and family ever you've known to go starve in the wilderness. Because we're the Good Guys."

If you're going to fight them it's either that, slaughter, or the taking of a lot of child prisoners. It's a complex situation, but that's what roleplaying is all about, inhabiting a character in a world and sometimes having to make tough choices. Hopefully they'll be support for a diplomatic option.

 

[DarkCrisis]

I'm a fan of tough choices, too. I wouldn't do it in a starter adventure though; let the newbies get their feet wet with the game systems and how their characters work before we go all Game of Thrones on them.

Yeah Im there with you.

Even then its a good RP moment. Maybe like mentioned above they adopt the kids and/or take upon themselves to find them new parents. Maybe start an orphanage.

Taking the kids out of the adventure takes away options and those cool moments. And yes sometimes hobos gonna hobo and I get people would rather err on the side of caution and not have that moment that might turn into child murder.

That's a whole other discussion that's been had before in other threads. Making it safe which is unfortunately needed in official products.

 

[Remathilis]

Honesty, I get it. I don't usually put monster kids in my dungeons BUT i'm also a big fan of the heroes having to make moral choices.

If an adventure has them finding monster kids or eggs or whatever, I'm interested to see what they do.

Not everything should be an easy served on a platter black and white choice IMO.

Unless that's what you are going for. More power to you.

Sure, the moral choice of slaughtering children or leaving them to fend for themselves. Can they hunt? Do they know what berries are poisonous? What to do when they see an owlbear? Probably not, depending on how young we're talking. You're condemning them to a slow death rather than a quick one. Even if a few of them survive, do you think they will look fondly on that act of charity? Or will they seek vengeance on their slaughtered family and thus perpetuate the cycle?

That's the problem, there is no good answer to that question. It's just a question of what kind of monster you want your PCs to be.

If you want to live in that morally gray world where PCs determine the fates of orphaned orcs and goblins, be my guest. Sprinkle some toddlers into your dungeons. But they have no business being in official products. The world is bleak enough that we don't need violence and child neglect to be part of it.

 

[DarkCrisis]

Sure, the moral choice of slaughtering children or leaving them to fend for themselves. Can they hunt? Do they know what berries are poisonous? What to do when they see an owlbear? Probably not, depending on how young we're talking. You're condemning them to a slow death rather than a quick one. Even if a few of them survive, do you think they will look fondly on that act of charity? Or will they seek vengeance on their slaughtered family and thus perpetuate the cycle?

That's the problem, there is no good answer to that question. It's just a question of what kind of monster you want your PCs to be.

If you want to live in that morally gray world where PCs determine the fates of orphaned orcs and goblins, be my guest. Sprinkle some toddlers into your dungeons. But they have no business being in official products. The world is bleak enough that we don't need violence and child neglect to be part of it.

As I pointed out there are other options besides quick and slow death. But one would never know if the choices is completely removed.

But I also get, some have to play it safe because the PCs might choose the worse option and then you and the others at your table roll with it or you don't. Why deal with it? I get it.

 

[Lidgar]

I hope we get something other than goblins......

Well, they could always do the Gnolls + Orcs combo. Then there's those Kobolds...

 

[Micah Sweet]

As I pointed out there are other options besides quick and slow death. But one would never know if the choices is completely removed.

But I also get, some have to play it safe because the PCs might choose the worse option and then you and the others at your table roll with it or you don't. Why deal with it? I get it.

I object to removing an option because some people think other people, who may or may not even be at your table and thus have any chance of affecting you, might in your opinion abuse it. That's what's being said here.

 

[DarkCrisis]

I object to removing an option because some people think other people, who may or may not even be at your table and thus have any chance of affecting you, might in your opinion abuse it. That's what's being said here.

I get it. But I get WotC has to play it safe. I know my preference and my tables preferences but WorC has to do what’s most acceptable

 

[Micah Sweet]

I get it. But I get WotC has to play it safe. I know my preference and my tables preferences but WorC has to do what’s most acceptable

They don't have to, but I understand they have chosen to do so in order to maximize profits.

This is why I stopped buying their stuff.